Элиша Бенджамин Эндрюс

«История Соединенных Штатов, Том 2»

Страница 3 из 5 · 55 006 зн. · 63 мин. чтения

Stony Point fame, Glover with his brave following of Marblehead

fishermen, who, able to row as well as shoot, manned the oars that

critical night when General Washington crossed to Trenton. But space is

too brief. Colonel Washington, the dashing cavalryman, was the Custer of

the Revolution. All the patriot ladies idolized him. In a hot

sword-fight with the Colonel, Tarleton had had three fingers nearly

severed. Subsequently in conversation with a South Carolina lady

Tarleton said: "Why do you ladies so lionize Colonel Washington? He is

an ignorant fellow. He can hardly write his name." "But you are a

witness that he can make his mark," was the reply.

DeKalb Wounded at Camden.

DeKalb was an American, too--by adoption. It is related that he

expostulated with Gates for fighting so unprepared at Camden, and that

Gates intimated cowardice. "Tomorrow will tell, sir, who is the coward,"

the old fellow rejoined. And tomorrow did tell. As the battle reddened,

exit Gates from Camden and from fame. We have recounted elsewhere how

like a bull De Kalb held the field. A monster British grenadier rushed

on him, bayonet fixed. DeKalb parried, at the same time burying his

sword in the grenadier's breast so deep that he was unable to extract

it. Then seizing the dead man's weapon he fought on, thrusting right and

left, till at last, overpowered by numbers, he slipped and fell,

mortally hurt.

Among the civilian heroes of the Revolution, Robert Morris, the

financier, deserves exceeding praise. Now turning over the lead ballast

of his ships for bullets, now raising $50,000 on his private credit and

sending it to Washington in the nick of time, now leading the country

back to specie payment in season to save the national credit, the

Philadelphia banker aided the cause as much as the best general in the

field.

Faithful and successful envoys as Jay and John Adams were, the

Revolution brought to light one, and only one, true master in the

difficult art of diplomacy--Franklin. Wise with a lifetime's shrewd

observation, venerable with years, preceded by his fame as scientist and

Revolutionary statesman, grand in his plain dignity, the Philadelphia

printer stood unabashed before the throne of France, and carried king

and diplomats with an art that surprised Europe's best-trained

courtiers. Never missing an opportunity, he yet knew, by delicate

intuition, when to speak and when to hold his tongue. Through

concession, intrigue, and delay, his resolute will kept steady to its

purpose. To please by yielding is easy. To carry one's point and be

pleasing still, requires genius. This Franklin did--how successfully,

our treaty of alliance with France and our treaty of peace with England

splendidly attested.

Towering above Revolutionary soldier, general, and statesman stands a

figure summing up in himself all these characters and much more. That

figure is George Washington, the most perfect human personality the

world has known. Washington's military ability has been much underrated.

He was hardly more First in Peace than First in War. That he had

physical courage and could give orders calmly while bullets whizzed all

about, one need not repeat. He was strategist and tactician too. Trenton

and Yorktown do not cover his whole military record. With troops

inferior in every single respect except natural valor, he

out-generalled Howe in 1776, and he almost never erred when acting upon

his own good judgment instead of yielding to Congress or to his

subordinates. His movements on the Delaware even such a captain as

Frederick the Great declared "the most brilliant achievements in the

annals of military action." Washington advised against the attempt to

hold Fort Washington, which failed; against the Canada campaign, which

failed; against Gates for commander in the South, who failed; and in

favor of Greene for that post, who succeeded. His army was indeed driven

back in several battles, but never broken up. At Monmouth his plan was

perfect, and it seems that he must have captured Clinton but for the

treason of Charles Lee, set, by Congress's wish, to command the van.

Indeed, of Washington's military career, "take it all in all, its long

duration, its slender means, its vast theatre, its glorious aims and

results, there is no parallel in history." [Footnote: Winthrop,

Washington Monument Oration. February 23, 1885.]

Yet we are right in never thinking of the Great Man first as a soldier,

he was so much besides. Washington's consummate intellectual trait was

sound judgment, only matched by the magnificent balance which subsisted

between his mental and his moral powers. "George had always been a good

son," his mother said. Nature had endowed him with intense passions and

ambitions, but neither could blind him or swerve him one hair from the

line of rectitude as he saw it. And he made painful and unremitting

effort to see it and see it correctly. He was approachable, but repelled

familiarity, and whoever attempted this was met with a perfectly

withering look. He rarely laughed, and he was without humor, though he

wrote and conversed well. He had the integrity of Aristides. His account

with Congress while general shows scrupulousness to the uttermost

farthing. To subordinate, to foe, even to malicious plotters against

him, he was almost guiltily magnanimous. He loved popularity, yet, if

conscious that he was right, would face public murmuring with heart of

flint. Became the most famous man alive, idolized at home, named by

every tongue in Europe, praised by kings and great ministers, who

compared him with Caesar, Charlemagne, and Alfred the Great, his head

swam not, but with steadfast heart and mind he moved on in the simple

pursuit of his country's weal. "In Washington's career," said Fisher

Ames, "mankind perceived some change in their ideas of greatness; the

splendor of power, and even the name of conqueror had grown dim in their

eyes." Lord Erskine wrote him: "You are the only being for whom I have

an awful reverence." "Until time shall be no more," said Lord Brougham,

"will a test of the progress which our race has made in Wisdom and

Virtue be derived from the veneration paid to the immortal name of

Washington." And Mr. Gladstone: "If among all the pedestals supplied by

history for public characters of extraordinary nobility and purity I saw

one higher than all the rest, and if I were required at a moment's

notice to name the fittest occupant for it, my choice would light upon

WASHINGTON." [Footnote: See Winthrop's Oration for these and other

encomia.]

CHAPTER IX.

THE OLD CONFEDERATION

[1781]

The Revolutionary Congress was less a government than an exigency

committee. It had no authority save in tacit general consent. Need of an

express and permanent league was felt at an early date. Articles of

Confederation, framed by Dickinson, of Pennsylvania, were adopted by

Congress in November, 1777. They were then submitted to the State

Legislatures for ratification. By the spring of 1779 all the States but

Maryland had given their approval. Upon the accession of the latter, on

March 1, 1781, the articles went into effect at once.

The Confederation bound the States together into a "firm league of

friendship" for common defence and welfare, and this "union" was to be

"perpetual." Each State retained its "sovereignty" and "independence,"

as well as every power not "expressly delegated" to the central

Government. Inhabitants of each State were entitled to all the

privileges of citizens in the several States. Criminals fleeing from one

State to another were to be returned.

Congress was composed of delegates chosen annually, each State being

represented by not less than two or more than seven. Each State had but

one vote, whatever the number of its delegates.

Taxation and the regulation of commerce were reserved to the State

Governments. On the other hand, Congress alone could declare peace or

war, make treaties, coin money, establish a post-office, deal with

Indians outside of the States, direct the army, and appoint generals and

naval officers. Many other things affecting all the States alike,

Congress alone could do. It was to erect courts for trial of felonies

and piracies on the high seas, and appoint judges for the settlement of

disputes between the States. It was to make estimates for national

expenses, and request of each State its quota of revenue.

To amend the Articles, the votes of the entire thirteen States were

demanded. Important lesser measures--such as those regarding war or

peace, treaties, coinage, loans, appropriations--required the consent of

nine States. Upon other questions a majority was sufficient. A

committee, composed of one delegate from each State, was to sit during

the recess of Congress, having the general superintendence of national

affairs.

The faults of the Confederation were numerous and great. Three

outshadowed the rest: Congress could not enforce its will, could not

collect a revenue, could not regulate commerce.

Congress could not touch individuals; it must act through the State

Governments, and these it had no power to coerce. Five States, for

instance, passed laws which violated the treaty provision about payment

of British creditors; yet Congress could do nothing but remonstrate.

Hence its power to make treaties was almost a nullity. European nations

did not wish to treat with a Government that could not enforce its

promises.

Congress could make requisition upon the States for revenue, but had no

authority to collect a single penny. The States complied or not as they

chose. In October, 1781, Congress asked for $8,000,000; in January,

1783, it had received less than half a million. Lack of revenue made the

Government continually helpless and often contemptible.

Yet in spite of their looseness and other faults, the adoption of the

Articles of Confederation was a forward step in American public law.

Their greatest value was this: they helped to keep before the States the

thought of union, while at the same time, by their very inefficiency,

they proved the need of a stronger government to make union something

more than a thought. The years immediately after the war were an

extremely critical period. The colonies had indeed passed through the

Red Sea, but the wilderness still lay before them. The great danger

which had driven them into union being past, State pride and jealousy

broke out afresh. "My State," not "my country," was the foremost thought

in most minds. There was serious danger that each State would go its own

way, and firm union come, if at all, only after years of weakness and

disaster, if not of war. The unfriendly nations of Europe were eagerly

anticipating such result. At this juncture the Articles of

Confederation, framed during the war when union was felt to be

imperative, did invaluable service. They solemnly committed the States

to perpetual union. Their provisions for extradition of criminals and

for inter-State citizenship helped to break down the barriers between

State and State. Congress, by discharging its various duties on behalf

of all the States, kept steadily before the public mind the idea of a

national government, armed with at least a semblance of authority.

The Franklin Penny.

"United States" "We Are One"

"Fugio" "1787" "Mind Your Business"

[1783]

The war had cost about $150,000,000. In 1783 the debt was

$42,000,000--$8,000,000 owed in France and Holland, and the rest at

home. The States contributed in so niggardly a way that even the

interest could not be paid. Five millions were owing to the army. Deep

and ominous discontent spread among officers and men. An obscure

colonel, supposed to be the agent of more prominent men, wrote to

Washington, advocating a monarchy as the only salvation for the country,

and inviting him to become king. In the spring of 1783 an anonymous

address, of menacing tone, was circulated in the army, calling upon it

for measures to force its rights from an ungrateful country.

[1785]

That the army disbanded quietly at last, with only three months' pay, in

certificates depreciated nine-tenths, was due almost wholly to the

boundless influence of Washington. How powerless the Government would

have been to resist an uprising of the army, was shown by a humiliating

incident. In June, 1783, a handful of Pennsylvania troops, clamoring for

their pay, besieged the doors of Congress, and that august body had to

take refuge in precipitate flight.

The country suffered greatly for lack of uniform commercial laws. So

long as each State laid its own imposts, and goods free of duty in one

State might be practically excluded from another, Congress could

negotiate no valuable treaties of commerce abroad.

The chief immediate distress was from this wretchedness of our

commercial relations, whether foreign or between the States at home. If

our fathers would be independent, king and parliament were determined to

make them pay dearly for the privilege. Accordingly Great Britain laid

tariffs upon all our exports thither. What was much harder to bear, an

order of the king in council, July 2, 1783, utterly forbade American

ships to engage in that British West-Indian trade which had always been

a chief source of our wealth. The sole remedy for these abuses in

dealing with England at that time was retaliation, but Congress had no

authority to take retaliatory steps, while the separate States could not

or would not act sufficiently in harmony to do so. If one imposed

customs duties, another would open wide its ports, filling the markets

of the first with British goods by overland trade, so that the customs

law of the first availed nothing. If Pennsylvania and New York laid

tariffs on foreign commodities, New Jersey and Connecticut people, in

buying imported articles from Philadelphia or New York, were paying

taxes to those greater States. North Carolina was in the same manner a

forced tributary to South Carolina and Virginia, as were portions of

Connecticut and Massachusetts to Rhode Island.

Dollar of 1794.

The First United States Coin.

"Liberty" "1794" "United States of America"

We also needed a complete system of courts, departments for foreign and

Indian affairs, and an efficient executive. The single vote for each

State was unfair, allowing one-third of the people to defeat the will of

the rest. The article requiring the consent of nine States made it

almost impossible to get important measures through Congress. Delegates

should not have been paid by their respective States. In consequence of

this provision, coupled with other things, Congress decreased in numbers

and importance. In November, 1783, less than twenty delegates were

present, representing but seven States, and Congress had to appeal to

the recreant States to send back their representatives before the treaty

of peace could be ratified.

[1787]

But the one grand defect of the Confederation, underlying all others,

was lack of power. The Government was an engine without steam. The

States, just escaped from the tyranny of a king, would brook no new

authority strong enough to endanger their liberties. The result was a

thin ghost of a government set in charge over a lot of lusty

flesh-and-blood States.

The Confederation, however, did one piece of solid work worthy of

everlasting praise. The Northwest Territory, embracing what is now Ohio,

Indiana. Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, had been ceded to the Union

by the States which originally claimed it. July 13, 1787, Congress

adopted for the government of the territory the famous Ordinance of

1787. It provided for a governor, council, and judges, to be appointed

by Congress, and a house of representatives elected by the people. Its

shining excellence was a series of compacts between the States and the

territory, which guaranteed religious liberty, made grants of land and

other liberal provisions for schools and colleges, and forever

prohibited slavery in the territory or the States which should be made

out of it. Thus were laid broad and deep the foundation for the full and

free development of humanity in a region larger than the whole German

Empire.

The passing of the Ordinance was probably due in large measure to the

influence of the Ohio Company, a colonist society organized in Boston

the year before. It was composed of the flower of the Revolutionary

army, and had wealth, energy, and intelligence. When its agent appeared

before Congress to arrange for the purchase of five million acres of

land in the Ohio Valley, a bill for the government of the territory,

containing neither the antislavery clause nor the immortal principles of

the compacts, was on the eve of passage. The Company, composed mostly of

Massachusetts men, strongly desired their future home to be upon free

soil. Their influence prevailed with Congress, eager for revenue from

the sale of lands, and even the Southern members voted unanimously for

the remodelled ordinance. The establishment of a strong and enlightened

government in the territory led to its rapid settlement. Marietta, 0.,

was founded in April, 1788, and other colonies followed in rapid

succession.

CHAPTER X.

RISE OF THE NEW CONSTITUTION

[1787]

The anarchy succeeding the Revolution was as sad as the Revolution

itself had been glorious. The Articles of Confederation furnished

practically no government with which foreign nations could deal; England

still clung to the western posts, contrary to the treaty of peace, with

no power anywhere on this side to do more than protest; the debt of the

confederacy steadily piled up its unpaid interest; the land was flooded

with irredeemable paper money, state and national; the confederacy's

laws and constitution were ignored or trampled upon everywhere; and the

arrogance and self-seeking of the several States surpassed everything

but their own contemptible weakness.

In 1786 Shays' rebellion broke out in Massachusetts. Solid money was

very scarce, and paper all but worthless, yet many debts contracted on a

paper basis were pressed for payment in hard money. The farmers swore

that the incidence of taxes upon them was excessive, and upon the

merchants too light. But the all-powerful grievance was the sudden

change from the distressing monetary injustice during the Revolution,

with the consequent increase of debts, to a rigid enforcement of

debtors' claims afterward. At this period men were imprisoned for debt,

and all prisons were frightful holes, which one would as lief die as

enter. Meetings were held to air the popular griefs, and grew violent.

In August the court-house at Northampton was seized by a body of armed

men and the court prevented from sitting. Similar uprisings occurred at

Worcester, Springfield, and Concord. The leader in these movements was

Daniel Shays, a former captain in the continental army. Governor Bowdoin

finally called for volunteers to put down the rebellion, and placed

General Lincoln in command. After several minor engagements, in which

the insurgents were worsted, the decisive action took place at

Petersham, where, in February, 1787, the rebels were surprised by

Lincoln. A large number were captured, many more fled to their homes,

and the rest withdrew into the neighboring States. Vermont and Rhode

Island alone offered them a peaceful retreat, the other States giving up

the fugitives to Massachusetts.

A Scene at Springfield, during Shays' Rebellion, when the

mob attempted to prevent the holding of the Courts of Justice.

The Shays commotion, for a long time shaking one of the stanchest States

in the Confederation, well showed the need of a far stronger central

government than the old had been or could be made. Other influences

concurred to the same conviction. Washington's influence, which took

effect mainly through his inspired letter to the States on leaving the

army, was one of these. National feeling was also furthered by the

spread of two religious sects, the Baptists and the Methodists, up and

down the continent, whose missionary preachers, ignoring State lines and

prejudices, helped to destroy the latter in their hearers.

[1785]

During the Revolution, American Methodism had been an appanage of

England. Wesley had discountenanced our effort at independence, and

when war broke out, all the Methodist preachers left the country, save

Asbury, who secreted himself somewhere in Delaware, waiting for better

days. But in 1784 this zealous body of Christians was organized as an

American affair, its clergy and laity after this displaying loyalty of

the most approved kind.

John Wesley.

Schemes had been mooted looking to a changed political order. A

proposition for a convention of the States to reform the Confederation

passed the New York Legislature in July, 1782, under the influence of

Alexander Hamilton; another passed that of Massachusetts, July, 1785,

urged by Governor Bowdoin; but because of too great love for state

independence and too little appreciation as yet of the serious nature of

the crisis, both motions failed of effect.

The idea of reform which found most favor, the only one which at first

had any chance of getting itself realized, was that of giving Congress

simply the additional power of regulating commerce. Even so moderate a

proposal as this had many enemies, especially in the South. Greatly to

her credit therefore as a Southern State, the purpose of amending the

old Articles in the direction indicated was first taken up in earnest by

Virginia. Her Legislature, soon after opening session in October, 1785,

listened to memorials from Norfolk, Suffolk, Portsmouth, and Alexandria,

upon the gloomy prospects of American trade, which led to a general

debate upon the subject. In this, Mr. Madison, by a speech far exceeding

in ability any other that was made, began that extended and memorable

career of efforts for enlarged function in our central government which

has earned him the title of the Father of the Constitution.

The result of this discussion was a bill directing the Virginia

delegation in Congress to propose amendment to the constitution giving

to Congress the needed additional power. The enemies of the bill,

however, succeeded in so modifying it by limiting the proposed grant of

power to a period of thirteen years, that Madison and its other abettors

turned against it and voted to lay it on the table.

There was in existence at this very time a joint commission

representing Virginia and Maryland, which had been raised for the

purpose of determining what jurisdiction each of the two States had over

the Potomac and in Chesapeake Bay. Madison was one of the Virginia

commissioners. A meeting had been held on March 17, 1785, at which the

commissioners agreed in their report to transcend their instructions and

to recommend to the two States uniform monetary and commercial

regulations entire, including common export and import duties. They thus

reported, adding the still further recommendation that commissioners to

work out the details of such a plan be appointed each year till it

should be completed. The Maryland Legislature adopted the report, adding

the proposition that Delaware and Pennsylvania also should be invited to

enter the system and to send commissioners.

When the commissioners' report, with Maryland's action thereon, came

before the Virginia Legislature, Madison moved, as a substitute for the

mutilated bill which had been tabled previously, that the invitation to

take part in the commission go to all the States. The motion passed by a

large majority.

[1786]

Thus originated the Annapolis Convention of 1786. Nine States appointed

delegates; all but Connecticut, Maryland, and the two Carolinas; but of

the nine only Virginia, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York

actually sent them. As the powers granted the commissioners presupposed

a deputation from each of the States, those present, after mature

deliberation, deemed it inadvisable to proceed, drawing up instead an

urgent address to the States to take "speedy measures" for another,

fuller, convention to meet on the second Monday of May, 1787, for the

same purposes as had occasioned this one. Such was the mode in which the

memorable Federal Convention came about. Its seat was Philadelphia.

[1787]

The second Monday of May, 1787, which should have witnessed the opening,

was the 14th, but on that day too few deputies had assembled. So late as

the 25th only nine States were represented. They, however, effected an

organization on the 25th and chose officers. On the 28th eleven States

were present, so that on the next day business began in earnest.

Governor Randolph read and expounded the Virginia plan for a new

government, and Charles Pinckney the South Carolina plan. Both of these

were referred to a committee of the whole to sit next day.

This Virginia plan was substantially the work of Madison, and was the

earliest sketch of the present Constitution of the United States. With

the Pinckney plan, it was worked over, debated, and amended in the

committee of the whole, until June 13th, on which day the committee rose

and reported to the Convention nineteen resolutions based almost wholly

upon the Virginia plan. These were the text for all the subsequent

doings of the Convention.

The so-called New Jersey plan was brought forward on June 15th, the gist

of it being a recurrence to the foolish idea of merely repairing the

Confederation that then was. Its strength, which was slight, consisted

in its accord with the letter of the credentials which the delegates had

brought. It was, however, emphatically rejected, the Convention

stretching instructions, ignoring the old government, and proceeding to

build from the foundations. On July 24th and 26th the resolutions, now

increased to twenty-three, were put in the hands of a committee of

detail to be reported back in the form of a constitution. They

reappeared in this shape on August 6th, and this new document was

henceforth the basis of discussion. On September 8th a new committee was

appointed to revise style and arrangement, and brought in its work

September 13th, after which additions and changes were few. The

Constitution received signature September 17th.

The Federal Convention of 1787 was the most remarkable gathering in all

our national history thus far. Sixty-five delegates were elected, but as

ten never attended, fifty-five properly made up the body. Even these

were at no time all present together. From July 5th to August 13th New

York was not represented. Rhode Island was not represented at all.

Washington was President; Franklin, aged eighty-one, the oldest member;

Gillman, of New Hampshire, aged twenty-five, the youngest. Each State

sent its best available talent, so that the foremost figures then in

American political life were present, the chief exceptions being John

Adams, Jefferson--both abroad at the time--Samuel Adams, not favorable

to the Convention, John Jay, and Patrick Henry. Eight of the members had

signed the great Declaration, six the Articles of Confederation, seven

the Annapolis appeal of 1786. Washington and a good half dozen others

had been conspicuous military leaders in the Revolution. Five had been

or still were governors of their respective States. Nearly all had held

important offices of one sort or another. Forty of the fifty-five had

been in Congress, a large proportion of them coming to the Convention

directly from the congressional session just ended in New York.

It is interesting to note how high many from this Constituent Assembly

rose after the adoption of the paper which they had indited. Washington

and Madison became Presidents, Gerry Vice-President, Langdon senator and

President of the Senate, with duty officially to notify him who was

already First in War that the nation had made him also First in Peace.

Langdon was candidate for Vice-President in 1809. Randolph was the

earliest United States Attorney-General, Hamilton earliest Secretary of

the Treasury, M'Henry third Secretary of War, succeeding General Knox.

Dayton was a representative from New Jersey in the IId, IIId, IVth, and

Vth Congresses, being Speaker during the last, then senator in the VIth,

VIIth, and VIIIth. Ellsworth and Johnson were Connecticut's first pair

of senators, Johnson passing in 1791 to the presidency of Columbia

College, Ellsworth to the national chief-justiceship to succeed Jay.

Rutledge was one of the first associate justices of the Supreme Court.

Subsequently, in July, 1795, Washington nominated him for chief justice,

and he actually presided over the Supreme Court at its term in that

year; but, for his ill-mannered denunciation of Jay's treaty, the Senate

declined to confirm him. Wilson and Patterson also each held the

position of associate justice on the supreme bench of the nation.

Rufus King, after the adoption of the Constitution, removed to New York.

He was a senator from that State between 1789 and 1795, and again

between 1813 and 1826; and Minister to England from 1796 to 1803, and

again after 1826 till his failing health compelled his resignation. He

was the federalist candidate for Vice-President in 1804 and 1808, and

for President in 1816. Sherman of Connecticut, Gillman of New Hampshire,

and Baldwin of Georgia, went into the House of Representatives and were

promoted thence to the Senate. Robert Morris of Pennsylvania, Gouverneur

Morris, now again of New York, Caleb Strong of Massachusetts, William

Patterson of New Jersey, Richard Bassett of Delaware, Alexander Martin

and Blount of North Carolina, Charles Pinckney and Butler of South

Carolina, and Colonel Few of Georgia, all became senators. Madison,

Gerry, Fitzsimmons of Pennsylvania, Carroll of Maryland, and Spaight and

Williamson of North Carolina, all wrought well in the House, but did not

reach the Senate. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney was nominated for the

Presidency in 1800, on the ticket with John Adams, again in 1804, and

still again in 1808.

Jared Ingersoll was the federalist candidate for Vice-President in 1812,

on the ticket with De Witt Clinton, against Madison and Gerry. Yates

rose to be Chief Justice of the State of New York, Lansing to be its

Chancellor. Gerry and Strong of Massachusetts, Patterson of New Jersey,

Bassett of Delaware, Spaight and Davie of North Carolina, and Charles

Pinckney of South Carolina, became Governors of their States, as did

Alexander Martin, of North Carolina, a second time.

Having received final revision and signature, the Constitution was

transmitted, with a commendatory letter from Washington, to the old

Congress. Suggestions were added relating to the mode of launching it.

Congress was requested to lay the new Great Charter before the States,

and, so soon as it should have been ratified by nine of them, to fix the

date for the election by these of presidential electors, the day for the

latter to cast their votes, and the time and place for commencing

proceedings under the revised constitution. Congress complied. The

debates of the Convention, only more hot, attended ratification, which

was carried in several States only by narrow majorities.

[1788-1790]

Delaware was the first to ratify, December 7, 1787. Pennsylvania and New

Jersey soon followed, the one on the 12th of the same month, the other

on the 18th. Delaware and New Jersey voted unanimously; Pennsylvania

ratified by a vote of forty-six to twenty-three. During the first month

of the new year, 1788, Georgia and Connecticut ratified, on the 2d and

9th respectively. New Hampshire next took up the question, but adjourned

her convention to await the action of Massachusetts. In this great State

the people were divided almost equally. Of the western counties the

entire population that had sympathized or sided with Shays was bitter

against the Constitution. The larger centres and in general the eastern

part of the State favored it. The vote was had on February 6th, and

showed a majority of only 19 out of 355 in favor of the Constitution.

Celebrating the Adoption of the Constitution in New York.

The good work still remained but half done. It was a crisis.

Accordingly, early in this year, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay published

their weighty articles, since collected in the immortal volume known as

"The Federalist." These discussions seemed to have much effect. Maryland

ratified on April 28th, and South Carolina on May 23d. New Hampshire

fell into line, the necessary ninth State to ratify, June 21st. Thus the

Constitution became binding, yet it was still painfully uncertain what

the action of Virginia and New York would be. In both States the

Constitution was opposed by many of the most influential men, and after

a long and heated canvass adoption occurred in Virginia by a majority of

only ten in a vote of 168; in New York by the narrow majority of two.

Even now North Carolina and Rhode Island remained aloof. The former, not

liking the prospect of isolation, came into the Union November 21, 1789,

after the new government had been some time at work. Rhode Island, owing

to her peculiar history in the matter of religious liberty, which she

feared a closer union would jeopardize, as well as to the strength of

the paper-money fanaticism within her borders, was more obdurate. The

chief difficulty here was to get the legislature to call a convention.

The New York Packet of February 20, 1790, in a letter from Rhode Island,

tells how this was accomplished. Among the anti-adoptionists in the

senate was a rural clergyman who, prompted by his conscience, or, as one

account runs, by exhortation and the offer of a conveyance by an

influential member of the adoption party, was, when Sunday came, absent

upon his sacred work. The occasion was seized for a ballot. The senate

was a tie, but the Governor threw the casting vote for a convention.

This was called as soon as possible, and on May 29, 1790, Rhode Island,

too, at the eleventh hour, made the National Constitution her own. Not

only had a MORE PERFECT UNION been formed at last, but it included all

the Old Thirteen States.

PART SECOND

THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE CONSTITUTION

PERIOD I.

THE UNITED STATES AND THE FRENCH REVOLUTION

1789-1814

CHAPTER I.

THE NEW GOVERNMENT

Notified on July 2, 1788, that nine States had voted approval of the

Constitution, Congress, on September 13th, set the first Wednesday in

January, 1789, for the choice of electors, the first in February for

their ballot, and the first in March for putting the new government in

motion. The first Wednesday in March, 1789, happening to fall on the

4th, this date has since remained as the initial one for presidencies

and congresses. The First Congress had no quorum in either branch on

March 4th, and did not complete its organization till April 6th.

Washington was inaugurated on April 30th, in New York, where the First

Congress, proceeding to execute the Constitution, held its entire first

session. Its second session was in Philadelphia, the seat of Congress

thence till the second session of the VIth Congress, 1800, since which

time Congress has always met in Washington.

The inauguration of our first President was an imposing event. As the

hero moved from his house on Franklin Square, through Pearl Street to

Broad, and through Broad to Federal Hall, corner of Wall Street, people

thronged every sidewalk, door-way, window, and roof along the entire

line of march. About him on the platform after his arrival stood John

Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Baron Steuben, Generals St. Clair and Knox,

Roger Sherman, and Chancellor Livingston. Washington advanced to the

rail, placed his hand upon his breast, and, bowing low, said audibly, as

the Chancellor in his robes solemnly recited the words, "I swear, so

help me God," reverently kissing the Bible as if to add solemnity to his

oath. "It is done," cried the Chancellor; "long live George Washington,

President of the United States!" The great crowd repeated the cry. It

was echoed outside in the city, off into the country, far north, far

south, till the entire land took up that watchword, which his own

generation has passed on to ours and to all that shall come, Long live

George Washington!

Let us study for a moment the habitat of the people over which the new

Chief Magistrate was called to bear sway. By the census of 1790, the

population of the thirteen States and of the territory belonging to the

Union numbered 3,929,214. It resided almost wholly on the Atlantic coast

from Maine to Florida. Not more than five per cent of it was west of the

mountains. The line of inner settlement, now farther, now nearer, ran at

an average distance from the coast of two hundred and fifty-five miles.

The coast land of Massachusetts, southern New England, and New York was

the most densely covered. The Hudson Valley was well peopled as far as

Albany. Farms and hamlets were to be met all the way from New York

across New Jersey to the Delaware, and far up the Delaware Valley

westward from that river. Maine, still belonging to Massachusetts, had

few settlements except upon her coast and a little way inland along her

great rivers. Vermont, not yet a State and claimed by both New Hampshire

and New York, was well filled up, as was all New Hampshire but the

extreme north.

The westward movement of population took mainly four routes, the Mohawk

and Ontario, the Upper Potomac, the Southwestern Virginia, and the

Western Georgia. The Mohawk Valley was settled, and pioneers had taken

up much land on Lake Ontario and near the rivers and lakes tributary to

it. Elmira and Binghamton had been begun. Pennsylvania settlers had

pressed westward more or less thickly to the lower elevations of the

Alleghanies, while beyond, in the Pittsburgh regions, they were even

more numerous. What is now West Virginia had squatters here and there.

Virginian pioneers had also betaken themselves southwestward to the head

of the Tennessee. North and South Carolina were inhabited as far west as

the mountains, though the population was not dense. In Northern

Kentucky, along the Ohio, lay considerable settlements, and in

Tennessee, where Nashville now is, there was another centre of

civilization. In the Northwest Territory, Detroit, Vincennes, Kaskaskia,

Prairie du Chien, Mackinac, and Green River were outposts, at each of

which a few white men might have been found.

The following table shows pretty nearly the population of the several

States about the end of the Revolution:

New Hampshire 102,000

Massachusetts 330,000

Rhode Island [1783] 51,869 [2,342 of them negroes,

464 mulattoes, 525 Indians.]

Connecticut [1782] 208,870

New York [1786] 215,283

New Jersey[1785] 138,934 [10,500 of them negroes.]

Pennsylvania 330,000

Delaware 37,000

Maryland 250,000 [80,000 of them negroes.]

Virginia 532,000 [280,000 of them negroes.]

North Carolina 224,000 [60,000 of them negroes.]

South Carolina 188,000 [80,000 of them negroes.]

Georgia [rough estimate] 80,000 [20,000 of them negroes.]

Another table exhibits approximately the number of houses in the

principal cities of the country in 1785-86. It was customary then in

estimating population to allow seven persons to each house. This

multiplier is probably too large rather than too small.

Cities

Houses Population, multiplying

number of houses by seven.

Portsmouth, N. H 450 3,150

Newburyport 510 3,570

Salem, Mass 730 5,210

Boston 2,200 15,400

Providence 560 3,920

Newport 790 5,530

Hartford 300 2,100

New Haven 400 2,800

New York 3,340 23,380

Albany and suburbs 550 3,850

Trenton 180 1,260

Philadelphia and suburbs 4,500 31,500

Wilmington 400 2,800

Baltimore 1,950 13,650

Annapolis 260 1,820

Frederick, Md. 400 2,800

Alexandria 300 2,100

Richmond 310 2,170

Petersburg 280 1,960

Williamsburg 230 1,610

Charleston 1,540 10,780

Savannah 200 1,400

The first New York City Directory appeared in 1786. It had eight hundred

and forty-six names, not going above Roosevelt and Cherry Streets on

the East side, or Dey Street on the West. There were then in the city

three Dutch Reformed churches, four Presbyterian, three Episcopal, two

German Lutheran, and one congregation each belonging to the Catholics,

Friends, Baptists, Moravians, and Jews. In 1789 the Methodists had two

churches, and the Friends two new Meetings. The houses in the city were

generally of brick, with tile roofs, mostly English in style, but a few

Dutch. The old Fort, where the provincial governors had resided, still

stood in the Battery. The City Hall was a brick structure, three stories

high, with wings, fronting on Broad Street. Want of good water greatly

inconvenienced the citizens, as there was no aqueduct yet, and wells

were few. Most houses supplied themselves by casks from a pump on what

is now Pearl Street, this being replenished from a pond a mile north of

the then city limits. New York commanded the trade of nearly all

Connecticut, half New Jersey, and all Western Massachusetts, besides

that of New York State itself. In short it did the importing for

one-sixth of the population of the Union. Pennsylvania and Maryland made

the best flour. In the manufacture of iron, paper, and cabinet ware,

Pennsylvania led all the States.

Over this rapidly growing portion of the human race in its widely

separated homes there was at last a central government worthy the name.

The old Articles of Confederation had been no fundamental law, not a

foundation but a homely botch-work of superstructure, resembling more a

treaty between several States than a ground-law for one. In the new

Constitution a genuine foundation was laid, the Government now holding

direct and immediate relations with each subject of every State, and

citizens of States being at the same time citizens of the United States.

Hitherto the central power could act on individuals only through States.

Now, by its own marshals, aided if need were by its army, it could

itself arrest and by its own courts try and condemn any transgressor of

its laws.

But if the State relinquished the technical sovereignty which it had

before, it did not sink to the level of an administrative division, but

increased rather in all the elements of real dignity and stability. Over

certain subjects the new constitution gave the States supreme, absolute,

and uncontrollable power. The range of this supreme state prerogative

is, in fact, wider on the whole than that of national. For national

action there must be demonstrable constitutional warrant, for that of

States this is not necessary. In more technical phrase: to the United

States what is not granted is denied, to the State what is not denied is

granted. It is a perpetual reminder of original state sovereignty, that

no State can without its consent be deprived of its equal suffrage in

the Senate. Each State also must have at least one representative.

States cannot be sued by private persons or corporations. Even upon

subjects constitutionally reserved for national law, if Congress has not

legislated state statute is valid.

Precisely as its advocates had prophesied, this revised order worked

well, bringing a blessed new feeling of security. On commerce and

business it conferred immense benefits, which rapidly became

disseminated through all classes of the population. The sense and

appearance of unity and consequent strength which the land had enjoyed

in the early days of the Revolution came back in greater completeness,

and was most gratifying to all. There was still a rankling hatred toward

England, and men hostile to central government on other grounds were

reconciled to it as the sole condition of successful commercial or naval

competition with that country.

The consequence was a wide-spread change of public feeling in reference

to the Constitution very soon after its adoption. Bitterest hostility

turned to praise that was often fulsome, reducing to insignificance an

opposition that had probably comprised a popular majority during the

very months of ratification. Many shifted their ground merely to be on

the popular side. With multitudes Washington's influence had more weight

than any argument.

The Constitution's unfortunate elasticity of interpretation also for the

time worked well. People who had fought it saw how their cherished views

could after all be based upon it. All parties soon began, therefore, to

swear by the Constitution as their political Bible. The fathers of the

immortal paper were exalted into demigods. Fidelity to the Constitution

came to be pre-eminently the watchword of those till now against its

adoption. They in fact shouted this cry louder than the Federalists, who

had never regarded it a perfect instrument of government. It came to

pass ere long that nothing would blast a public measure so instantly or

so completely as the cry of its unconstitutionality.

[Click on map for larger image.]

Map Showing the Progressive Acquisitions of Territory by the United States

Few can form any idea of the herculean work performed by the First

Congress in setting up and starting our present governmental machinery.

The debt which we owe the public men of that time is measureless. With

such care and wisdom did they proceed, that little done by them has

required alteration, the departments having run on decade after decade

till now essentially in their original grooves. The Senate formed itself

into its three classes, so that one-third of its members, and never more

than this, should retire at a time. Four executive departments were

created, those of State, the Treasury, War, and the

Attorney-Generalship. The first occupants were, respectively, Jefferson,

Hamilton, Knox, and Randolph.

Of the present departments of government the post-office alone has come

down from colonial times, Benjamin Franklin having been general

superintendent thereof under the British Government. He was re-appointed

by the second Continental Congress, in July, 1775. The First Congress

under the Constitution erected a general post-office, but its head

attained the dignity of a regular cabinet officer not till about 1830,

and then only by custom. To begin with, in fact, there was strictly no

cabinet in the modern sense. Washington's habit was to consult his

ministers separately.

Under the Articles of Confederation there had been a treasury board of

several commissioners, and a superintendent of finance. The new

arrangement, making one man responsible, was a great improvement. A law

was passed forbidding the Secretary of the Treasury to be concerned in

trade or commerce, that is, to be a merchant. The late A. T. Stewart,

appointed by President Grant to the office, was rejected as ineligible

under this law. Yet no department of our Government has had a finer

record than the Treasury.

Not only had the First Congress to vote revenue, but to make provision

for the collection of this. Revenue districts had to be mapped out, the

proper officers appointed, and light-houses, buoys, and public piers

arranged for along the whole coast. Salaries were to be fixed, and a

multitude of questions relating to the interpretation and application of

the Constitution to be solved by patient deliberation. The United States

Mint was erected, and our so felicitous monetary system, based upon the

decimal principle along with the binary, established in place of the

desperate monetary chaos prevailing before. Hitherto there were four

sorts of colonial money of account all differing from sterling, while

Mexican dollars and numberless other forms of foreign money were in

actual circulation.

The noblest part of all this work was the organization of the federal

judiciary, through an act drawn up with extraordinary ability by Oliver

Ellsworth of Connecticut. A Chief Justice--the first one was John

Jay--and five associates were to constitute the Supreme Court. District

courts were ordained, one per State and one each for Kentucky and Maine,

not yet States; also three circuit courts, the eastern, the middle, and

the southern; and the jurisdiction of each grade was accurately fixed.

As yet there were no special circuit judges, nor, excepting the

temporary ones of 1801, were there till some eighty years later. Clerks,

marshals, and district-attorneys were part of this first arrangement.

Originally the Attorney-General was little but an honorary officer. He

kept his practice, had no public income but his fees, and resided where

he pleased.

As his title implies, the Secretary of War was to have charge of all the

nation's means of offence and defence, there being until April 30, 1796,

no separate secretary for the navy. We had indeed in 1789 little use for

such a functionary, not a war-vessel then remaining in Government's

possession. In 1784 our formidable navy consisted of a single ship, the

Alliance, but the following year Congress ordered her sold.

The senators most active in the creations just reviewed were Langdon,

King, and Robert Morris, besides Ellsworth. In the House, Madison outdid

all others in toil as in ability, though worthily seconded by

distinguished men like Fisher Ames, Gerry, Clymer, Fitzsimmons,

Boudinot, and Smith. The three Connecticut representatives, Sherman,

Trumbull, and Wadsworth, made up perhaps the ablest state delegation in

the body.

CHAPTER II.

FEDERALISM AND ANTI-FEDERALISM

[1790]

Early in the life of our Constitution two parties rose, which, under

various names, have continued ever since. During the strife for and

against adoption, those favoring this had been styled Federalists, and

their opponents, Anti-Federalists. After adoption--no one any longer

really antagonizing the Constitution--the two words little by little

shifted their meaning, a man being dubbed Federalist or Anti-Federalist

according to his preference for strong national government or for strong

state governments. The Federalist Party gave birth to the Whig Party,

and this to the modern Republican Party. The Anti-Federalists came to be

called "Republicans," then "Democratic-Republicans," then simply

"Democrats."

The central plank of the federalist platform was vigorous single

nationality. In aid of this the Federalists wished a considerable army

and navy, so that the United States might be capable of ample

self-defence against all foes abroad or at home. Partly as a means to

this, partly to build up national feeling, unity, self-respect, and due

respect for the nation abroad, they sought to erect our national credit,

which had fallen so low, and to plant it on a solid and permanent basis.

As still further advancing these ends they proposed so to enforce regard

for the national authority and laws and obedience to them, that within

its sphere the nation should be absolutely and beyond question paramount

to the State.

In many who cherished them these noble purposes were accompanied by a

certain aristocratic feeling and manner, a carelessness of popular

opinion, an inclination to model governmental polity and administration

after the English, and an impatience with what was good in our native

American ideas and ways, which, however natural, were unfortunate and

unreasonable. Puffed up with pride at its victory in carrying the

Constitution against the opposition of the ignorant masses, this party

developed a haughtiness and a lack of republican spirit amounting in

some cases to deficient patriotism.

The early Federalists were of two widely different stripes. There were

among them Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Jay; and there were the

interested and practical advocates of the same, made up of business men

and the wealthy and leisurely classes, who, without intending to be

selfish, were governed in political sympathy and action mainly by their

own interests.

The greatest early Anti-Federalists were Jefferson, Madison, and

Randolph, all of whom had been ardent for the Constitution. The party as

a whole, indeed, not only acquiesced in the re-creation of the general

Government, but was devotedly friendly to the new order. But while

Republicans admitted that a measure of governmental centralization was

indispensable, they prized the individual State as still the main pillar

of our political fabric, and were hence jealous of all increased

function at the centre. It became more and more their theory that the

States, rather than the individuals of the national body politic, had

been the parties to the Constitution, so making this to be a compact

like the old Articles, and the government under it a confederacy as

before 1789.

Another issue divided the parties, that between the strict and the more

free interpretation of the Constitution--between the close

constructionists and the liberal constructionists. The question dividing

them was this: In matters relating to the powers of the general

Government, ought any unclear utterance of the Constitution to be so

explained as to enlarge those powers, or so as to confine them to the

narrowest possible sphere? Each of the two tendencies in construction

has in turn brought violence to our fundamental law, but the sentiment

of nationality and the logic of events have favored liberality rather

than narrowness in interpreting the parchment. When in charge of the

government, even strict constructionists have not been able to carry out

their theory. Thus Jefferson, to purchase Louisiana, was obliged, from

his point of view, to transcend constitutional warrant; and Madison, who

at first opposed such an institution as unconstitutional, ended by

approving the law which chartered the Second United States Bank.

The Federalists used to argue that Article I, Section VIII., the part of

the Constitution upon which debate chiefly raged, could not have been

intended as an exhaustive statement of congressional powers. The

Government would be unable to exist, they urged, to say nothing of

defending itself and accomplishing its work, unless permitted to do more

than the eighteen things there enumerated. They further insisted that

plain utterances of the Constitution presuppose the exercise by Congress

of powers not specifically enumerated, explicitly authorizing that body

to make all laws necessary for executing the enumerated powers "and all

other powers vested in the Government of the United States or in any

department or officer thereof."

In reply the Anti-Federalists made much of the titles "United States,"

"Federal," and the like, in universal use. They appealed to concessions

as to the nature of our system made by statesmen of known national

sympathies. Such concessions were plentiful then and much later. Even

Webster in his immortal reply to Hayne calls ours a government of

"strictly limited," even of "enumerated, specified, and particularized"

powers. Two historical facts told powerfully for the anti-federalist

theory. One was that the government previous to 1789 was unquestionably

a league of States; the other was that many voted for the present

Constitution supposing it to be a mere revision of the old. Had the

reverse been commonly believed, adoption would have been more than

doubtful.

CHAPTER III.

DOMESTIC QUESTIONS OF WASHINGTON'S ADMINISTRATIONS

[1790-1791]

I. Tariff.--Upon declaring their independence the United States threw

open their ports, inviting trade from all nations. During the Revolution

foreign commerce had become an important interest, and at its close the

Обложка выбранной аудиокниги Выберите главу Плеер готов к воспроизведению
0:00 0:00

Громкость