Online Encyclopedia


Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V27, Page 695 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: it!
AMERICAN WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.) 58. The news of the outbreak of hostilities aroused strong feeling throughout the colonies. The Second Continental Congress met under its influence. Its members, however, had been chosen and instructed before the clash of arms, and for that reason the course which had been worked out for them differed only slightly, if at all, from that which had been followed by their predecessors. To a certain extent the new body adhered to the former course of action. But a state of war now existed in New England and on the Canadian border. Troops were expected soon to arrive at New York. Reports of these events were thrust upon the attention of Congress at once, and the provinces involved asked for advice as to what course they should pursue. The northern frontier especially demanded attention. As a result of these events in the colonies generally the Association was being changed from a system of co-operation against British trade into a union for purposes of defence. This new situation the Congress was forced to meet. This it did largely by resolutions of advice to the colonies, but also by positive orders. Of the former class were the resolutions about the procuring of military supplies, the assumption of powers of government by the various colonies, and concerning defence at New York City, on the northern frontier and, later, in the Highlands of the Hudson. Of a more decisive character was the appointment of officers for the army, George Washington being made commander-in-chief, the prescribing of their pay, the issue of continental bills of credit, the issue of articles of war, the regulation of trade and of Indian affairs, and the establishment of postal communication. As the colonies were passing through a strong reaction against executive authority, second the Congress did its business with the help of continental temporary committees and did not seek to establish congress• a permanent executive. The same was true for a time of the congresses and conventions in the different colonies. As the movement progressed through 1775 and the early months of 1776, executive authority in the royal and proprietary provinces collapsed. The assemblies were either dissolved or ceased to meet. The governors, their authority gone, retired on board British vessels of war, returned to England or, perchance, found themselves prisoners in the hands of the revolutionists. This gradual fall of the old governments, imperial and colonial, was the revolution on its negative side. The rise of the system of congresses, conventions and committees, deriving their authority from the people, was the revolution on its positive side, and foreshadowed the new federal system which was rising on the ruins of the half-federated empire. The process in the different colonies was as varied as were their social and political conditions. 59. In Connecticut and Rhode Island the corporate system of government, which they had inherited from the 17th century, necessitated no change. The general assemblies always had been the centres of power, and the leading officials were elective for short terms and were subject to the control of the electorate. So far as the internal organization of the colonies was concerned that was all which the revolution demanded. In the twoproprietary provinces—Pennsylvania and Maryland—the executives were not so directly interested and pledged to support the imperial government as were those of the royal provinces. But Governor Robert Eden of Maryland was so tactful that, though the last Assembly met in 1774, he was able, with the courts, to keep up some form of government there in the name of the Crown and proprietor until the early summer of 1776. In Pennsylvania the proprietors, though in sympathy with the British government, never sought actively to influence events in their province. So strong was the conservative spirit there that the proprietary Assembly even met—though without a quorum—as late as September 1776, at the time when the convention was completing the first constitution of the state. In the royal provinces the prorogation of the legislatures for indefinite or prolonged periods caused them early to disappear—that of Massachusetts in October 1774. The burgesses of Virginia last met for business in May 1774. They were prorogued to several later dates, but the governor was Collapse of never again able to meet them. The long and im- the Royal portant session of January-March 1775 was the last Govern- ever held by the New York Assembly. In April 1775 menu. Governor John Martin of North Carolina met the Assembly for the last time, and even then the Provincial Convention was in session at the same time and place and the membership of the two bodies was the same. In May 17 7 5 disappeared the Assembly of Georgia; in June those of New Hampshire and South Carolina met for the last time. Governor William Franklin was able to meet the Assembly of New jersey as late as November, but months before that date the Provincial Convention had practically assumed the control of affairs. The royal courts and executives continued some form of activity a few months longer and then totally vanished. 6o. After Bunker Hill the command at Boston had been transferred from Gage to Sir William Howe. In July Washington took command of the colonists and gradually established some degree of order and discipline among them. Though the American levies were raw and ever fluctuating in numbers, the British never seriously attempted to break through their lines. Indeed, it was not the plan of the British to make New England the chief seat of war. As early as the 2nd of August 1775 Lord Dartmouth wrote to General Gage on " the obvious advantages that would attend the taking Possession of New York and the hazard of the Army's continuing at Boston." On the 5th of September he wrote to Howe that every day's intelligence exhibited this fact in a clearer light. Rhode Island was considered as a convenient naval station, and steps were soon taken to secure possession of it and its surrounding waters. This indicates what was necessarily the fact, that the British would so plan the war as to secure the maximum of advantage from their fleet. This would give them an easy command of the entire coast, and enable them to secure a foothold at strategic centres. Hence it was that, though the arrival of a fresh supply of cannon enabled Washington to fortify Dorchester Heights, this simply enabled him to hasten a process for which Howe had long been preparing. The evacuation occurred Evacuation on the 17th of March 1776, and the British force of Boston; withdrew temporarily to Halifax. Meantime the American bold expeditions of Arnold and Montgomery against against Canada—suggesting the joint efforts of the French Canada. wars—had met with only a partial success. Montreal had been occupied, but the assault upon Quebec had failed. A small American force awaited the return of spring in Canada, in order that they might renew the struggle for that colony. - 61. The view, as it was now repeatedly expressed by king and parliament, was that the colonists were in open rebellion. North's offer of conciliation was peremptorily rejected by Congress. The acts of parliament were being openly resisted, and Congress in its manifestoes had ignored the two houses. There-fore the British government stood committed to coercion. That was the meaning of the legislation of the winter of 1776—the prohibition of trade with the rebellious colonies, the increase of the estimates for the army and navy, the employment of German auxiliaries for service in America. Preparations were made to send a large military and naval force against the colonies the following season, and that it should operate in part against the insurgents in New York and the southern colonies and in part through Canada. New England was no longer to be the direct object of attack. The Howes, as commanders of the royal army and navy, were appointed commissioners to grant assurance of peace and pardon and the repeal of the obnoxious acts, provided submission was made and some way could be found by parliament in which an imperial revenue for purposes of defence could be secured from the colonies. Military operations, meanwhile, should be directed against points of least resistance, and in that way, if possible, the union of the colonies should be broken. The trend of British policy indicated that an invasion from Canada might be attempted and the effort be made to hold Charleston, Philadelphia, and especially New York as strategic points on the coast. 62. The course of events in the colonies by which this situation was met was the erection of a system of feeble defences about New York and the removal thither of the army of about 9000 men in the spring of 1776; the fitting out of privateers to prey on British commerce and of a few small armed vessels by the colonies and the general government to watch the coast and procure supplies; the disarming of loyalists; the opening of American ports to the trade of all peoples who were.not subject to the British Crown; and the tentative opening of relations with France. As the result of a combination of ill luck, bad management and American energy the British suffered a repulse at Charleston, South Carolina, in June, which was analogous to the affair of the year before at Bunker Hill, and which necessitated a postponement of their plans in the South. The Congress and the various revolutionary bodies in the colonies were forced to carry on war upon a constantly increasing scale. They had to assume powers of government and gradually to perfect their organization for the purpose. Committees in Congress became more permanent. Conditions approximating to those which existed the year befole in New England extended through the colonies generally. On the 15th of May 1776, as the result of various earlier applications on the subject, and especially of one from certain Whigs in New York, the Congress recommended to the assemblies and conventions of the colonies where no government sufficient to the exigencies of their affairs had been established, " to adopt such government as shall, in the opinion of the representatives of the people, best conduce to the happiness of their constituents in particular and of America in general." The preamble to this resolution set forth as facts the statements that the colonies had been excluded from the protection of the Crown, that no answer had been given to their petitions for redress, and that the whole force of the kingdom was to be used for their destruction, and therefore that it was no longer reason-able or honest for the colonists to take the oaths or affirmations necessary for the support of government under the Crown. organlza- Though the preamble was warmly debated, it was tion of State adopted. And this act marked a turning-point, for Govern- the progress of events from that time to the declara- ments; Declaration tion of independence was rapid and decisive. The of lade- colonies—now becoming states—one after another, pendence. in response to letters from Philadelphia, empowered their delegates to concur in declaring independence. On the 7th of June R. H. Lee of Virginia introduced in Congress a resolution " that these United Colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent states," that it was expedient forth-with to take effectual measures for securing foreign allies, and that a plan of confederation should be formed. John Dickinson and others, speaking for the Middle Colonies, argued that the order of procedure should be reversed. But John Adams and the more aggressive party insisted that the proposed declaration would simply state the facts and would open the way for foreign alliances; that it was useless to wait for unanimity. The debate showed that the delegates from the Middle Colonies and South Carolina could not act, and so the decision was postponed for three weeks. In the interval steps were taken to draft a plan of treaties and articles of confederation. A board of war and ordnance, the earliest germ of an executive department, was also created by Congress. At the end of the three weeks the delegates from all the colonies except Georgia, South Carolina and New York had received instructions favourable to independence. The two former left their delegates free, and under the influence of the British attack on Charleston they voted for independence. News had just come that Howe had landed with a large force at Sandy Hook—as events proved, it was an admirably equipped army of 30,000 men, supported by a fleet. Under the impression of these stirring events Dickinson and his leading supporters ceased their opposition, and the Declaration, substantially in the form given to it by Thomas Jefferson, was agreed to (July 4, 1976), only three adverse votes being cast. The delegates from New York took no part, but a few days later the act was approved by the convention of that state. The signing of the document by the members took place at a later time. Thus triumphed the tendencies toward self-government which had been predominant in the continental colonies from the first, and which the system of imperial control had only superficially modified and restrained. But the most significant part of the document for the future was the preamble, in which the democratic aspirations of the new nation were set forth, the spirit to which Thomas Paine had just made so powerful an appeal in his Common Sense. Governments, it was said, derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and when any system becomes destructive of these ends it is the right of the people to abolish it and to institute a new government, establishing it upon such principles and under such forms as seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. (See INDEPENDENCE, DECLARATION OF.) E.—The Struggle to Maintain Independence, ,1976-1783. 63. Viewed from one standpoint, the declaration of independence was apparently an act of the utmost recklessness. The people were by no means a unit in its support, and in several of the states widespread indifference to it, or active sympathy with, the British, prevailed. In New York, South Carolina and Georgia a condition of civil war came sooner or later to exist. The United States, as yet, had no international status, and it would seem that that must be secured, if at all, by a series of victories which would ensure independence. But how could these be won against the greatest naval power on the globe, supported by veteran armies of continental and British troops? The colonies had no money; the few vessels which, as a collective body, they did send out, were more like privateers than anything else. Their army was an undisciplined throng of militiamen, serving on short enlistments, without organized commissariat, and for the most part under inexperienced officers. Its numbers, too, were far inferior to those of the British. Taxation by the Continental Congress for the support of the war Finance; was not among the possibilities of the case. The weaknesses colonies were struggling against taxation by one imperial body, and it was not likely that they would submit to similar impositions at the hands of another. The Congress, moreover, as has truly been said, was little more than a general committee or interstate council of safety, and had to proceed largely by way of advice. A strong tendency also toward the provision for immediate needs by the issue of bills of credit had been inherited from the period of the French wars, and resort was again had to that device. The battle of Bunker Hill had been immediately followed by an order of Congress for, the issue of $2,000,000 in that form of currency. Issues followed in rapidly increasing amounts, until by the close of 1779 $241,000,000 had been authorized. The states put out nearly as much ($209,000,000), Virginia and the two Carolinas issuing the largest amounts. All that Congress could do to secure the redemption of its issues was to recommend to the states to provide the means therefor; but this they failed to do, or even to provide for the redemption of their own issues. The continental paper money depreciated until it became and Defects of the American General Government. worthless, as to a large extent did that of the states also. The states decreed it to be legal tender, and dire threats were uttered against those who refused to receive the bills; but all to no purpose. The Congress also tried to induce the states to tax themselves for the general cause and was forced to rely on requisitions for the purpose. The colonies had insisted that the system of requisitions was good enough for the mother country, but when applied by Congress it proved as complete a failure as when resorted to by the Crown. The revolution was therefore never financed. It early became necessary to resort to loans and that chiefly from foreign sources. It was therefore an absolute necessity that the colonies should secure international recognition and status. Then loans were obtained from the governments of France and Spain and from private bankers in Holland to the amount of about $7,830,000. 64. The collapse of royal government left the colonies in a chaotic state. The old institutions had disappeared and new ones could not be immediately developed to take their place. But the institutions of local government, the town and county systems, were left intact, and upon these as a basis the new fabrics were erected. It was therefore easier to construct the governments of the states than to define and develop the general government. At first little else was intended than that the Congress should be the mouthpiece of the patriot party. It proceeded mainly by way of recommendation, and looked to the states, rather than to itself, as the ultimate sources of authority. Upon them it depended for the execution of its measures. The common will, as well as enactment, was lacking which would have given the force of positive law to the measures of Congress. As the war proceeded the states grew jealous of the central body and tried to prevent appeals to it from the state courts in prize cases. Under the pressure of war, moreover, the enthusiasm, which had been strong at the outset, declined, and it became increasingly difficult to secure co-operation or sacrifice toward any general enterprise. At the same time, war devolved upon Congress an enormous burden of work. It was forced to devise general policies and provide for their execution, and also to attend to an infinite number of administrative details. This was due not only to the exigencies of the time, but to the fact that no general executive was developed. As was characteristic not only of this revolution, but of all others, the committee system underwent an enormous development. " The whole congress," wrote John Adams, " is taken up, almost, in different committees, from seven to ten in the morning. From ten to four or sometimes five we are in congress, and from six to ten in committees again." " Out of a number of members," writes another, " that varied from ten dozen to five score, there were appointed committees for a hundred varying purposes." Upon its president and secretary the Congress was forced to depend not a little for the diligence and ability which was requisite to keep the machine going. But as the war progressed most of the able members were drawn off into the army, into diplomatic service or into official service in the states. Sectional and state jealousies also developed and became intense. By many the New Englanders were regarded with aversion, and members from that section looked with dislike upon the aristocrats from the South. As the Congress voted by states the smaller commonwealths were often moved by jealousy of their larger rivals to thwart important measures. But, above all, the con-duct of the war and foreign relations occasioned infinite jealousies and cabals, while many of the most important measures seemed to meet with downright indifference. Washington's correspondence abounds in evidence of these facts, while it is well known that he was the object against whom one of the cabals of the time was directed. Benjamin Franklin was the object of somewhat similar jealousies. But, as time passed, rudimentary executive departments, beginning with the board of war and the postmaster-general, were developed, and some advance was made toward a working and permanent system. In 1781 the offices of foreign secretary, superintendent of finance, secretary of war and secretary of marine were created. 65. For a time, and indeed during most of the struggle, the course of the land war seemed to justify these criticisms and gloomy fears. Until its very close the campaign of 1776, from the American standpoint, was a dismal failure. The battle of Long Island was lost by the Americans and, as at Bunker Hill, it would have been quite possible for the British to have captured the entire force which opposed them on Long Island. Howe compelled Washington to evacuate New York City. On the 16th of November the practical abandonment of the state of New York by the main army was necessitated W triagtoa by the capture of Fort Washington. Earlier in the year the Americans had been compelled to retire from Canada, while the Tories in northern New York were contributing valuable aid to the British. 66. But there was another side to the picture, and already certain faint outlines of it might be discerned. The British commander was proceeding slowly, even according to established European methods. At almost every step he was failing to seize the advantages that were within his reach, while Washington was learning to play a losing game with consummate patience and tact. Although he was constantly trying to rouse Congress and the states to more vigorous action, he showed no disposition to break with the civil power. Already, too, the physical obstacles arising from the wooded and broken character of the country, and from the extremely poor means of communication, were becoming apparent to the British; while the Americans always had the alternative, if too hard pressed, of withdrawing beyond the mountains. After Washington had crossed the Delaware, Howe, instead of seizing Philadelphia and driving Congress and the American army to some remote places of refuge, as he might have done, prepared for winter quarters. Washington seized the opportunity to return across the Delaware and surprise the British outposts at Trenton (Dec. 26, 1776) and Princeton (Jan. 3, 177.7), and thus secured a safe post of observation for the winter at Morristown. Confidence was to an extent restored, the larger part of New Jersey was regained, and many loyalists were compelled to take the oath of allegiance. Howe's plan for the next campaign involved the strengthening of his army by large reinforcements from home and by all the men who could be spared from Canada. With this force he proposed to capture Philadelphia and thereby to bring the War of Independence to an end in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York. New England and the states farther south could then be dealt with in detail. But Howe was over-ruled by Lord George Germain, the colonial secretary, whose plan included an invasion from Canada, in which Tories and Indians should share, while Howe should advance up the Hudson and meet the northern forces at Albany. If this ambitious scheme should succeed, the British would occupy the valley of the Hudson and New England would be cut off from the rest of the colonies. General Burgoyne was appointed to command the northern expedition. But the failure of the plan was almost ensured from the outset by neglect on the part of British officials to instruct General Howe as to his part in its execution, while Burgoyne was forced to surrender near Sara-toga on the 17th of October. Meanwhile, Howe, who had long waited for instructions respecting the northern expedition, was finally informed that he might undertake the Pennsylvania campaign, but with the hope that at its close he would still be able to march up the Hudson. Thereupon, embarking his army, Howe sailed for Chesapeake Bay, at the head of which he landed and advanced towards Philadelphia. Washington's army opposed his march at the Brandywine (Chad's Ford), but was defeated (Sept. 11, 1777) and forced to retire beyond Philadelphia. The British then entered the city (Sept. 26) and the Congress withdrew to Lancaster, and later to York, in the interior of Pennsylvania. The British fleet had in the meantime arrived in Delaware Bay, and, after a prolonged and brave defence, had captured Forts Mercer and Mifflin. When the winter began the Delaware, as well as lower New York and Rhode Island, was in the possession of the British. With the fragments of an army Washington retired to Valley Forge (q.v.). 67. But the influence of Burgoyne's surrender in Europe was to prove a turning-point in the war. Since 1763 a strong sentiment at the French court had been favourable to a resumption of war with Great Britain. An opportunity was now presented by the colonial revolt. In November 1775 the Congress created a committee of secret correspondence, which, in April 1777, was developed into a committee of foreign affairs, and this continued until 1781, when the office of foreign secretary was established. To Congress, and to the members who were serving on its secret committee, the possible attitude of France was known from an early date. The necessity of securing supplies and loans from Europe was also imperative, though the United States had nothing to pledge in repayment except the future products of her soil. In February 1776 Silas Deane (q.v.) was sent to Paris, ostensibly as a business agent, and with the connivance of the French government supplies were sent to America and American vessels were received into French ports. Soon American privateers were bringing their prizes into French harbours, and British commerce began to suffer from these attacks. On the French side Beaumarchais and others actively co-operated in this. In the autumn of 1776 Congress appointed three commissioners to France, and resolved that Spain, Prussia, Austria and other European states should be approached with a view to securing recognition and aid. In December 1776 Franklin, who, with Deane and Arthur Lee, had been appointed commissioner to France, arrived at Paris, bringing with him proposals for treaties of commerce and alliance. But, though the attitude of the French court toward the Americans was friendly, and though it continued to send secret aid, and to exert a favourable influence upon Spain, yet it could not be French- induced to abandon its outward appearance of American neutrality until after the news of Burgoyne's Alliance, surrender arrived. Then the real purpose of the French government was r+vealed. On the 6th of February 1778 the treaties were signed, and in the following summer war between France and England began. The influence of France under the Family Compact was also persistently used to bring Spain into the alliance. The latter was naturally hostile to England, but her aversion to colonial revolts and her desire to substitute mediation for war kept her from declaring against England until April 1779. In October 1779 Henry Laurens (q.v.) was elected minister to the Netherlands, and sailed for Europe, taking with him a plan of a commercial treaty. But Laurens and his papers were captured by the British at sea, and partly by that event the Netherlands were forced into war with England. With the other states of northern Europe they undertook to defend the interests of neutrals against the arrogant enforcement by Great Britain of the rights of search at sea. Thus the conflict expanded into a commercial and naval war, Great Britain being confronted by the larger part of Europe. 68. The conclusion of the treaty of alliance by France was immediately followed by the equipment of a fleet under the comte d'Estaing, which sailed from Toulon in April 1778, having on board M Conrad Alexandre Gerard de Rayneval, who had been accredited as minister to the United States, and Silas Deane, who was returning to report to Congress. Sir Henry Clinton had now succeeded Howe in command of the British army. The certainty that a French fleet would soon appear in American waters made it necessary for the British to evacuate Philadelphia and return to a point on the coast where the army could be in easy communication with the fleet. This fact shows how the French affiance had changed the nature of the war. It now became to a large extent a contest between the two navies, the principal evolutions of which occurred in West Indian and European seas. (See AMERICAN WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.) In the north the British now relatively neglected the land war, and refrained from sending such forces to the eastern coast as had supported Howe in 1776. The Americans, on the other hand, had a naval force upon which they relied, in the hope that the blockade of their coasts might be raised and trade routes opened more freely. On the evacuation of Philadelphia in June Washington's army pursued the British as they retired toward New York, and the indecisive battle of Monmouth was fought on the 28th of June. It did not prevent Clinton from reaching New York, and that city continued to be the centre of British power and operations in the north until the close of the war. The Congress returned to Philadelphia, where Gerard was received, and where he was soon exercising an influence favourable to the policies of Washington and opposed to the clique of which General Horatio Gates was the leader. Washington's army came gradually to occupy a line of forts, of which West Point in the Highlands of the Hudson was the citadel. From there as a centre it was possible to communicate with Newport on the east and with the Delaware region on the south, and at the same time to prevent the British from gaining access to the interior of the country. Though the fleet of D'Estaing carried a heavier equipment of cannon than did that of Admiral Howe, the French commander did not choose to risk an attack on New York, but passed eastward to Newport. Howe followed him, while Washington and his generals planned active co-operation with the new allies by land. But a sudden storm so dispersed and injured the fleets that the French admiral retired to Boston for repairs and later sailed for the West Indies. 6g. While the war and foreign relations were thus developing, the states were organizing their governments and Congress was beginning to consider articles of confederation state c.. between the states. In this way an effort was made satutions. to gather up and make permanent the positive results of the revolution. As under the chartered and royal governments of the colonial period the source of political authority had been the Crown, now by a necessary reaction this was sought in the people. This principle had been stated in the Declaration of Independence, and had been implied ,throughout the earlier controversy and in much of the history of the colonies as well. The colonies had insisted on a more precise definition of the powers of government; they had opposed parliament because its powers were undefined and therefore dangerous. Following these ideas, the states now described their institutions of government and defined their powers by means of written constitutions. These were formulated by the provincial congresses—which had now become the legislatures—or, as they came to insist upon a more specific expression of the popular will, by conventions chosen for the purpose by the electors. Connecticut and Rhode Island retained their colonial charters. In the earlier days of hasty and temporary devices, the constitutions, like statutes, had been promulgated by the legislatures which formed them and had been put into force by their authority alone. But as time passed and more permanent arrangements became necessary an express popular approval of the instruments was insisted upon and was obtained before they were put into force. The establishment of state governments in this way began before the issue of the Declaration of Independence. It was actively continued during 1776 and the early months of the following year, by which time all of the states had secured at least a temporary constitution. South Carolina and New Hampshire revised theirs before the close of the war. Massachusetts did not secure a constitution which suited her until 178o, but then her procedure corresponded in all particulars with what was to be later American practice in such matters. Of the constitutions of the revolutionary period the two most striking features were the bills of rights and the provisions which were made concerning the executives and their relations to the legislatures. The men of that generation were jealous of government. They insisted upon individual rights, not as acquired and guaranteed by the state, but as original, natural and inhering in time prior to all governments. Governments were instituted for the common benefit, protection and security. Officials were trustees and were accountable to the people. There should be no hereditary title to office or power. There should be no titles of nobility, and in Virginia the system of entails was swept away. Monopolies were declared to be inconsistent with the spirit of a free state. The doctrine that it was unlawful to resist arbitrary power was declared to be absurd. Freedom of the press and of conscience was asserted, and no obstacles to fair and speedy jury trials were to be tolerated. Elections should be free and frequent, and a preference was expressed for short terms of office. The legislature was universally regarded as the most important department of government. Although the principle of the separation of powers was recognized, in eight states provision was made that the executives should be elected by the legislatures, eleven withheld from them the veto, and the states generally provided for a council to advise them. So manifold and important, however, were the restrictions on suffrage that the states were as yet far from being democracies. On the other hand, many wild and impractical ideas were cherished, and there were anarchic tendencies, which were revealed soon after the war and still later, under the influence of the French Revolution. 70. The first draft of the Articles of Confederation between the states was prepared by John Dickinson in the early summer TheArticlesOf 1776 and was reported. The report was debated ofcon- for some weeks after the issue of the Declaration of federation. Independence. Owing to the pressure of war it was then laid aside until the autumn of 1777. By that time the feeling in favour of state sovereignty had so increased that the impossibility of securing assent to the articles in any form had begun to be feared. But the document was completed and submitted to the states in November 1777, when all were encouraged by the news of Burgoyne's surrender. The system for which provision was made in this document was a " confederacy," or " firm league of friendship " between the states, for their common defence, security and general welfare. The Congress was to be continued, and was to consist of delegates annually appointed by the legislature of each state and paid by their states. No attempt was made to create an executive for the confederacy, though authority was given to Congress to appoint a council of state which should manage general affairs, especially during recesses of Congress. To Congress various general powers were entrusted, as deciding on peace and war and superintending the conduct of the same, building a navy, controlling diplomatic relations, coining money and emitting bills of credit, establishing post offices, regulating Indian trade, adjusting boundary disputes between the states. The financial powers entrusted to Congress included those of borrowing money and determining necessary expenditures, but not the power to tax. For supplies the general government had to depend on requisitions from the states. The same system also had to suffice for the raising and equipment of troops. Congress could not make its laws or orders effective in any matter of importance. This was simply a continuation of the policy under which the revolution was being conducted. The Americans had thought that the military and financial concerns of the British Empire could be managed under a system of requisitions, and now they were bent upon trying it in their own imperial relations. The control of trade was also practically left with the states, the Americans in this matter failing to live up to the requirements of the British system. The predominance of the states was further ensured by the provision that no votes, except those for daily adjournment, could be carried with-out the assent of a majority of all the states, and no important measure without the consent of nine states. But a common citizenship was declared to exist, and Congress received authority to establish a court of appeal which might pass finally on all disputes between states. Taken as a whole, the Articles of Con-federation would bear favourable comparison with other schemes of their kind, and they fairly represented the stage of development to which the American states had then attained. The defects which existed in them were reflections of the immaturity, political and social, which had always been apparent in the Americans as colonists and which was to characterize them as a nation for generations to come. 71. We have seen that, on the whole, the attitude of Great Britain, after the peace of 1763, was not favourable to the colonization of the Mississippi Valley. To the colonists the Quebec Act gained in offensiveness by seeming to imply that it was intended to exclude them from the West. But all such plans were swept away by the outbreak of the War of Independence. Already, before the beginning of The West. hostilities, emigrants had begun to flock across the mountains. Plans were on foot for the establishment of a number of commonwealths, or proprietary provinces, as the case might be. Vandalia was planned in western Virginia, Watauga in western North Carolina. Daniel Boone and his associates pushed farther west into the Kentucky region, and there it was proposed to establish the commonwealth of Transylvania. Other similar projects were started, all repeating in one form or another the political methods which were used when the seaboard colonies were first settled. The backwoodsmen who managed these enterprises were extreme individualists, believed in the propriety of resistance to governments, and were in full sympathy with the War of Independence. They desired to escape to the free land and life of the West and be rid of the quit-rents and other badges of dependence which still lingered in the East. The states which had claims in the West opposed the founding of independent settlements there and, if possible, induced the settlers to be content with the status of counties within some one of the eastern states. After the beginning of the War of Independence, the British from Detroit incited Indian raids for the purpose of destroying or driving out the settlers, especially in Kentucky. These provoked the expeditions of George Rogers Clark (q.v.), in 1778 and 1779. With a force of Virginians he seized Kaskaskia and later, after a long march, captured Vincennes and compelled General Henry Hamilton, who had come with a relief force from Detroit, to surrender. This secured to the Americans a permanent hold upon the North-West. But Spain, after she entered upon the war, was determined, if possible, to wrest the valley of the Mississippi from the British and to keep all, or the larger part of it, for herself. To that end, operating from New Orleans, her troops took possession of Natchez, and other posts on the lower Mississippi, and occupied Mobile and Pensacola. These events prevented the possibility of the expulsion of the Americans from the West, but devolved upon their representatives at Paris the necessity of engaging in a diplomatic contest against Spain for the purpose of securing the Mississippi as the western boundary of the United States. But meanwhile the occupation of the West by Americans had a notable influence upon the ratification of the Articles of Confederation. 72. Within the Confederacy a fundamental line of cleavage was that between the large and small states. It was jealousy on the part of the latter, their fear lest they might Articles of be absorbed by their larger neighbours, which had Confederanecessitated the adoption of the plan that in the aon Rats-Congress the delegates should vote by states. When fled ;the articles were referred to the states for ratification, the difficulty reappeared. Massachusetts, Connecticut and New York, with Virginia and the three states to the south of it, had large claims to territory between the Appalachians and the Mississippi. New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland, which were without hope of westward extension, hesitated to enter the Confederacy, if the large states were to be still further increased by additions to their areas of vast stretches of western country. They insisted that before ratification the states which had claims to western lands should surrender these for the common benefit of the United States. Maryland insisted upon this until, in the end, the cause of state equality and of nationality triumphed. Congress declared that the ceded lands should be formed into states, which should become members of the union with the same rights as other states. When, in 1781, this course of action had become possible, Maryland ratified the articles and they came into effect. The possibility of the expansion of the United States through the development of territories was thus ensured. 73. So far as the North American continent was concerned, the character of the last stage of the struggle with Great Britain was determined by the fact that the British resolved to transfer the main seat of war to the Southern states, in the hope that Georgia and South Carolina might be detached from the Union. At the close of 1778 Savannah was captured. In September 1779 D'Estaing returned and assaulted The warm Savannah, but, failing to capture it, sailed for France. the South. In 178o Clinton sailed from New York, besieged Charleston with a force much superior to that of Lincoln, and captured it (May 12). State government in South Carolina ceased. But the chance of detaching those states from the Union and of bringing the war in that region to an end was finally lost by the British. This was chiefly due to an order which recalled the paroles of many of those who had surrendered at Charleston and required that they should perform military service under the British. The attempt to enforce this order, with the barbarities of Colonel Banastre Tarleton and certain Tory bands, provoked a bloody partisan conflict in the upper districts, especially of South Carolina, which contributed more than any other cause to turn the scale against the British in the remote South. By the winter of 1781 they were forced back to Charleston and Savannah. (See AMERICAN WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.) 74. During the summer of 1780 Washington was prevented from accomplishing anything in the North by the demoralized condition of the finances and by the decline of public spirit. It was very difficult to secure recruits or supplies. The pay of the troops had fallen so into arrears that some of them had already begun mutiny. A second French squadron and military force, under De Ternay and Rochambeau, landed at Newport, but they were at once shut up there by the British. Clinton and Cornwallis were now planning that the latter, having put down resistance in the remote South, should march through North Carolina and Virginia to Baltimore and Philadelphia and that a junction of the two British forces should be effected which, it was believed, would complete the ruin of the American cause. This, too, was the period of Arnold's treason and the death of Andre. But the turn of the tide in favour of the Americans began with the partisan warfare in South Carolina, which delayed the northward march of Cornwallis, who retired to Yorktown. Wilmington and thence marched north with a small force into Virginia, and in July retired to Yorktown, in the peninsula of Virginia. Washington and Rochambeau had meantime been planning a joint move against the British at New York, or possibly in Virginia, and a letter was sent to De Grasse, the French admiral in the West Indies, suggesting his co-operation. De Grasse replied that he would sail for the Chesapeake. This confirmed Washington and Rochambeau in the opinion that they should march at once for Virginia and, after junction with the force of Lafayette, co-operate with De Grasse against Cornwallis. By well-timed movements the forces were brought together before Yorktown (q.v.), and Cornwallis was forced to surrender on the 19th of October 1781. 75. As the effect of this event was to drive Lord North from power in England, it proved to be the last important operation of the war in America. The king was compelled to give way. Rockingham was called into office at the head of a cabinet which considered the recognition of American independence to be indispensable. The negotiations fell into the hands of Shelburne, the friend of Franklin and disciple of Adam Smith. Richard Oswald was the leading British agent, while Franklin, Jay, John Adams and Henry Laurens were the American negotiators. From the first the acknowledgment of independence, the settlement of the boundaries and the freedom of fishing were insisted on as necessary terms by the Americans. Free commercial intercourse and the cession of Canada to the United States, partly in payment of war claims and partly to create a fund for the compensation of loyalists, were also put forward as advisable conditions of peace. The first three points were early conceded by the British. They also agreed to restrict Canada to its ancient limits. But discussions later arose over the right to dry fish on the British coasts, over the payment of debts due to British subjects prior to the war,and over the compensation of the loyalists. Adams vigorously insisted upon the right to dry and cure fish on British coasts, and finally this concession was secured. Franklin was opposed to the demands of the loyalists, and they had to be content with a futile recommendation by Congress to the states that their claims should be adjusted. It was also agreed that creditors on either side should meet with no lawful impediment to the collection of their debts. Both France and Spain considered the claims of the Americans to be excessive, and were not inclined to yield to them. But the Americans negotiated directly with the British and the articles were signed without consultation with the French government. This course was offensive to Vergennes, but it was insisted upon as necessary, especially by Jay and Adams, while the diplomatic skill of Franklin prevented a breach with France. Peace was formally ratified on the 3rd of September 1783. 76. The American army was now disbanded. Since the close of active military operations both officers and men had been striving to secure their pay, which was hopelessly in arrears. Congress had voted half-pay to the officers for life, and many had agreed to accept a commutation of this in the form of full pay for a certain number of years. Certificates for these amounts were issued. But in this, as in other cases, it was found impossible to procure the money for the purpose from the states. Parts of the army repeatedly mutinied, and it was only the influence of Washington which prevented a general outbreak against Congress and the civil government. When the disbandment was finally effected the officers found their certificates depreciated in value and the states indisposed to honour them. They consequently received only a small part of their due, and the privates scarcely anything. This deplorable result was due in part to poverty, but quite as much to bad faith. The country was left in a most demoralized condition, the result of the long war and the general collapse of public and private credit which had accompanied it. It should not be forgotten that the conflict had taken to a considerable extent the form of a civil war. In many of the states Loyalists and Whigs had been arrayed against one another, and had been more or less fully incorporated with the two contending armies. In general the Loyalists showed less capacity for combined action than did their opponents, and in the end they were everywhere defeated. The real tragedy of the conflict will be found, not in the defeat of the British, but in the ruin of the Loyalists. It was accompanied by wholesale confiscations of property in many quarters, and by the permanent exile of tens of thousands of the leading citizens of the republic. These were the emigres of the War of American Independence, and their removal deeply affected property relations and the tone and structure of society in general. Many of those who had been social and political leaders were thus removed, or, if they remained, their influence was destroyed (see LOYALISTS). New men and new families rose in their places, but of a different and in some ways of an inferior type. By this process sympathizers with the War of-Independence gained and kept the ascendancy. British and monarchical influences were weakened, and in the end the permanence of republican institutions was ensured. But, as had been foreseen, society in this period of transition exhibited so many repulsive features as almost to cause the stoutest hearts to despair. Treaty of Peace. colonial period. Connecticut has printed The Colonial Records of Connecticut (15 vols., Hartford, 1850-189o), and the Records of the Colony of New Haven, 1638-1665 (2 vols., Hartford, 1857-1858). The Records of the Colony of Rhode Island fill io vols. (Providence, 1856-1865). New York has published the Laws and Ordinances of New Netherland (i vol.), the Colonial Laws of New York from 1664 to the Revolution (5 vols., Albany, 1894), The Journal of the Legislative Council, 1691-1775 (2 vols., 1861), the Journal of the Votes and Proceedings of the General Assembly, 1691-1765 (2 vols., 1764-1766), the Documents relating to the Colonial History of New York (15 vols., 18J3-1883), Minutes of the Albany Commissioners for Detecting Conspiracies (3 vols., 1909-1910) and the Documentary History of the State of New York (4 vols., 1849-1851). New Jersey has published the Grants and Concessions (I vol.), edited by Learning and Spier, and 28 vols. of The Archives of the State of New Jersey (Newark, 188o sqq.). Pennsylvania has published 16 vols. of Colonial Records,1683-1790 (Philadelphia,' 852) and four series of Pennsylvania Archives (1852-1856, 1874-1893, 1894-1895, &c.), the latter containing miscellaneous records relating to the colonies and the War of Independence. Under the title of Statutes at Large (11 vols.) its laws to the close of the War of Independence have been published. The Archives of Maryland (27 vols., Baltimore) contain the proceedings of the council, the assembly and the provincial court, with the laws, for a part of the colonial period. The Records of the Virginia Company of London (2 vols., Washington, 1906) have been printed; also Henning's Statutes at Large (13 vols., 1819-1823), and the Journal of the House of Burgesses for the later provincial period. Under the titles of Colonial Records (1886- ) and State Records, North Carolina has published the sources of her early history very fully, except the land papers and laws. Thomas Cooper's Statutes of South Carolina (4 vols., to 1782) contain practically all of its sources which that state has published. Georgia has published 12 vols. of Colonial Records, containing minutes of the trustees and of the governor and council. The Calendar of State Papers, Colonial Series, 1574-1660 (London, 186o), and for 1661-1700 (13 vols., London, 1880-1910), the Acts of the Privy Council Colonial, 1613-1720 (2 vols., London,1908-1910) ,and the Calendars of Treasury Papers (for the 18th century) cover relations between the British government and the colonies. Additional matter may also be found in many of the reports of the British Historical MSS. Commission. Hazard's Historical Collections (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1792-1794) is still valuable. B. Perley Poore's Federal and State Constitutions (2 vols., Washington, 1877) contains the texts of the colonial charters and state constitutions; and a similar collection was edited by F. N. Thorpe (7 vols., ibid., 1909). The records of many New England towns have been printed, as also those of New York City, Philadelphia and Albany. The Original Narratives of Early American History (1906-1910), edited by J. F. Jameson, contain reprints of much source material. Cobbett's Parliamentary History, Almon's Remembrancer (17 vols., London, 1775-1784), and the writings of the British statesmen of the period, contain much material which is indispensable to the history of the War of Independence on its British side. Of official matters relating to the period of the War of Independence, special reference should be made to the Public Journals of the Continental Congress (13 vols.), and the Secret Journals (4 vols.). A new and improved edition (1908 sqq.) has been edited by W. C. Ford and G. Hunt. Indispensable to the student is Peter Force's American Archives (9 vols., Washington, 1837-1853), covering the years 1774 to 1776 inclusive. Francis Wharton's Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence of the United States (6 vols., Washington, 1889), and the earlier and less complete edition of the same by Jared Sparks (12 vols., Boston, 1829—1830), are also of great value. Alden Bradford's Massachusetts State Papers is valuable for that province. The journals of committees of safety, provincial congresses, conventions and early state legislatures are also for the most part in print. The colonial and revolutionary newspapers contain material of great variety. Semi-official also are the writings of the states-men of the War of Independence—John and Samuel Adams, Jefferson, Dickinson, Franklin, Washington, Jay, all of which exist in very satisfactory editions. Henri Doniol's Histoire de la participation de la France a l'e'tablissement des Etats-Unis d'Amerique (5 vols., Paris, 1886-1900) is a diplomatic history of the War of Independence and the peace, dealing chiefly with France. The states all have historical societies, and there are many private and local societies in addition. Of these the most prominent are the societies of Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia. In addition, mention should be made of the Prince Society of Boston, the American Antiquarian Society of Worcester, Mass., the Essex Institute of Salem, Mass., the Narragansett Club of Providence, R.I., and the Colonial Society of Massachusetts. The American Historical Association (Washington, D.C.) publishes valuable monographs; the second volume of the Report of the Association for 1905 is a detailed Bibliography of American Historical Societies (Washington, 1907). Standard Histories: Of these the histories of the states first demand attention. Jeremy Belknap's History of New Hampshire (3 vols., 1784-1792; enlarged, 3 vols., Boston, 1813); Thomas Hutchinson's History of the Province of Massachusetts Bay (3 vols., Boston, 1767, and vol. iii., London, 1828) ; Samuel Greene Arnold's History of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, 1636-1790 '(2 vols., New York, 1859-186o); Benjamin Trumbull's Complete History of Connecticut, Civil and Ecclesiastical, to 1764 (New Haven, 1818; revised, 2 vols., New London, 1898); John Romeyn Brodhead's History of the State of New York (2 vols., New York, 1853-1871); William Smith's History of the Late Province of New York, from its Discovery to 1762 (2 vols., New York, 1829—'830); Samuel Smith's History of the Colony of Nova Ca:saria, or New Jersey, to 1721 (Burlington, N.J., 1765; 2nd ed., Trenton, 1877) ; Robert Proud's History of Pennsylvania from 1681 till after the year 1742 (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1797-1798) ; John Leeds Bozman's History of Maryland, 1633-166o (2 vols., Baltimore, 1837) ; John V. L. McMahon's A Historical View of the Government of Mary-land from its Colonization to the Present Day (Baltimore, 183; William Stith's History of the First Discovery and Settlement of Virginia (Williamsburg, 1747) ; John Daly Burk's History of Virginia (3 vols., Petersburg, 18o4-18o5); Francois Xavier Martin's History of North Carolina (2 vols., New Orleans, 1829) ; William James Rivers's Sketch of the History of South Carolina to the Close of the Proprietary Government by the Revolution of 1719 (Charleston, 1856) ; Edward McCrady's South Carolina (4 vols., New York, 1897-1902)—covering the period from 167o to 1783—and Charles Colcock Jones's (jun.) History of Georgia (2 vols., Boston, 1883) are especially noteworthy. William Bradford's History of Plimouth Plantation (latest edition, Boston, 1898), and John Winthrop's History of New England. 1630-1649 (2 vols., Boston, 1825-1826), are essentially original sources, as are the Writings of Captain John Smith (Arber's ed.) for early Virginia. So are Alexander Brown's Genesis of the United States (2 vols., Boston, 189o), and the First Republic in America (Boston, 1898). Philip Alexander Bruce's Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (2 vols., New York, 1896) and W. B. Weeden's Economic and Social History of New England (2 vols., Boston, 189o) are of great value. Edmund B. O'Callaghan's History of New Netherland (2 vols., New York, 1846-1848), John Gorham Palfrey's History of New England (5 vols., Boston, 1858-189o) and I. B. Richman's Rhode Island, its Making and its Meaning (New York, 1902), are valuable for colonial New York, New England and Rhode Island respectively. George Bancroft's History of the United States (6 vols., 1884-1885) still has a great reputation, though it is altogether inadequate for the colonial period. Richard Hildreth's History of the United States (6 vols., New York, 1849-1852) is dry but accurate. John Andrew Doyle's English in America (5 vols., New York, 1882-1907) is valuable for the 17th century. Herbert L. Osgood's American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century (3 vols., New York, 1904-1907) discusses the institutional history of the period. John Fiske has popularized the history of the times in a number of excellent works, some of them of 'decided originality. Francis Parkman's France and England in North America (12 vols., latest ed., Boston, 1898) is a classic on the history of Canada and its relations with the British colonies. William Kingsford's History of Canada (io vols., Toronto, 1887-1898), and Francois Xavier Garneau's Histoire du Canada (4 vols., Quebec, 1845-1852), may be cited as holding places of special authority. Justin Winsor's Christopher Columbus (Boston, 1891), Cartier to Frontenac (ibid., 1894), and later volumes,-are especially valuable for the history of exploration, discovery and cartography. The American Nation (22 vols., New York, 1903-1907), a co-operative history, edited by A. B. Hart, outlines the political history of the country as a whole. Edward Channing's History of the United States (8 vols., New York, 1905 sqq.), and Elroy McKendree Avery's History of the United States and Its People (15 vols., Cleveland, Ohio, 1905 sqq.) devote much space to the colonies and War of Independence. Sir George Otto Trevelyan's American Revolution (3 vols., London, 1899-1904) is a brilliant literary performance. Of special value is Lecky's study of the same subject in his History of England in the Eighteenth Century (8 vols., London, 1878-189o). George Louis Beer's Origins of the British Colonial System (New York, 1908) and his British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765 (New York, 1907), Justin Harvey Smith's Our Struggle for the Fourteenth Colony (2 vols., New York, 1907) and S. G. Fisher's Struggle for American Independence (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1908) are valuable monographs. For biography see the " American Statesmen Series " (16 vols., Boston) and Samuel V. Wells's Life and Public Services of Samuel Adams (3 vols., Boston, 1865) ; James Kendall Hosmer's Life of Thomas Hutchinson (Boston, 1896) ; William Garrott Brown's Life of Oliver Ellsworth (New York, 1905) ; B. J. Lossing's Life and Times of Philip Schuyler (2 vols., New York, 186o-1873) and Bayard Tucker-man's Philip Schuyler, Major-General in the American Revolution (New York, 1903) ; George Washington Greene's Life of Nathanael Greene (3 vols., Boston, 1867-1871) and William Johnson's Sketches of the Life and Correspondence of Nathanael Greene (Charleston, 1822) ; William Thompson Reed's Life and Correspondence of George Reed (Philadelphia, 1870) ; Charles Janeway Stille's Life and Times of John Dickinson (Philadelphia, 1891); William Wirt Henry's Patrick Henry (3 vols., New York, 1891) ; John Marshall's Life of George Washington (5 vols., Philadelphia, 1804-1807) ; C. Tower's The Marquis de La Fayette in the American Revolution (2 vols., ibid., 1895) F. Kapp's Life of Frederick William von Steuben (New York, I859), and his Life of John Kalb (New York, 1884). Moses Coit Tyler's Literary History of the American Revolution (2 vols., New York. 1897) is of unique interest. Lorenzo Sabine's Biographical Sketches of Loyalists of the American Revolution (2 vols., Boston, 1864), and Claude Halstead Van Tyne's The Loyalists in the American Revolution (New York, 1902); Herbert Friedenwald's The Declaration of Independence (New York, 1904), and John Hampden Hazelton's the Declaration of Independence—Its History (New York, 1906), are valuable special studies. Many important monographs have appeared in the "Johns Hopkins University Studies," "the Columbia University Studies," the "Harvard Historical Studies,' and among the publications of the universities of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. The Carnegie Institution has issued the first volume of a report.. edited by C. M. Andrews and F. G. Davenport, on materials in British archives for the period before 1783. The bibliography of American history receives adequate treatment in Justin Winsor's Narrative and Critical History of America (8 vols., Boston, 1886–1889) and in J. N. Larned's Literature of American History (Boston, 1902). (H. L. O.) F.—The Struggle for National Government, 178,3–1789. 77. The long struggle to secure the ratification of the Articles of Confederation had given time for careful consideration of the new scheme of government. Maryland's persistent criticism had prepared men to find defects in them. Conventions of New England states, pamphlets, and private correspondence had found flaws in the new plan; but a public trial of it was a necessary preliminary to getting rid of it. The efforts of the individual states to maintain the war, the disposition of each state to magnify its own share in the result, the popular jealousy of a superior power, transferred now from parliament to the central government, were enough to ensure the articles some lease of life. A real national government had to be extorted through the " grinding necessities of a reluctant people." 78. Congress and its committees had already begun to declare that it was impossible to carry on a government efficiently under the articles. Its expostulations were to be continued for several years before they were heard. In the meantime it did not neglect the great subject which concerned the essence of nationality—the western territory. Virginia had made a first offer to cede her claims, but it was not accepted. A committee of Congress now made a report (1782) maintaining the validity of the rights which New York had transferred to Congress; and Territorial in the next year Virginia made an acceptable offer. cessions, Her deed was accepted (March 1, 1784); the other claimant states followed; and Congress, which was not authorized by the articles to hold or govern territory, became the sovereign of a tract of some 430,000 sq. m., covering all the country between the Atlantic tier of states and the Mississippi river, from the British possessions nearly to the Gulf of Mexico. 79. In this territory Congress had now on its hands the same question of colonial government in which the British Territorial parliament had so signally failed. The manner in Qovernment. which Congress dealt with it has made the United States the country that it is. The leading feature of its plan was the erection, as rapidly as possible, of states, similar in powers to the original states. The power of Congress over the Territories was to be theoretically absolute, but it was to be exerted in encouraging the development of thorough self-government, and in granting it as fast as the settlers should The Ord)- become capable of exercising it. Copied in succeed-nonce of ing acts for the organization of Territories, and still 1787. controlling the spirit of such acts, the Ordinance of 1787 (July 13, 1787) is the foundation of almost everything which makes the modern American system peculiar. 80. The preliminary plan of Congress was reported by a committee of which Thomas Jefferson (q.v.) was chairman, and was adopted by Congress on the 23rd of April 1784. It provided for the erection of seventeen states, north and south of the Ohio, with some odd names, such as Sylvania, Assenisipia, Metropotamia, Polypotamia and Pelisipia. "These states were for ever to be a part of the United States, and to have republican governments. The provision, "After the year 1800 there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said states, other than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been duly convicted," represented Jefferson's feeling on this subject. but was lost for want of seven states in its favour. 81. The final plan of 1787 was reported by a committee of which Nathan -Dane, of Massachusetts, was chairman. The prohibitionof slavery was made perpetual, and a fugitive slave clause was added. The ordinance covered only the territory north of the Ohio, and provided for not less than three nor more than five states. Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin have been the resultant states. At first Congress was to appoint the governor, secretary, judges and militia generals, and the governor and judges were, until the organization of a legislature, to make laws subject to the veto of Congress. When the population reached 5000 free male adult inhabitants the Territory was to have an assembly of its own, to consist of the governor, a legislative council of five, selected by Congress from ten nominations by the lower house, and a lower House of Representatives of one delegate for every 500 free male inhabitants.' This assembly was to choose a delegate to sit, but not to vote, in Congress, and was to make laws not repugnant to " the principles and articles " established and declared in the ordinance. These were as follows: the new states or Territories were to maintain freedom of worship, the benefits of the writ ot habeas corpus, trial by jury, proportionate representation, bail, moderate fines and punishments, and the preservation of liberty, property and private contracts; they were to encourage education and keep faith with the Indians; they were to remain for ever a part of the United States; and they were not to interfere with the disposal of the soil by the United States, or to tax the lands of the United States, or to tax any citizen of the United States for the use of the navigable waters leading into the Mississippi or St Lawrence rivers. These articles were to be unalterable unless by mutual consent of a state and the United States. The transformation of the Territory, with its limited government, into a state, with all the powers of an original state, was promised by Congress as soon as the population should reach 6o,0oo free inhabitants, or, under certain conditions, before that time. 82. The Constitution, which was adopted almost immediately afterwards, provided merely (art. iv, § 3) that " Congress shall have power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting, the territory or other property belonging to the United States," and that " new states may be admitted by the Congress into this Union." Opinions have varied as to the force of the Ordinance of 1787. The Southern school of writers have been inclined to consider it ultra vices and void ; and they adduce the fact that the new Congress under the Constitution thought it necessary to re-enact the ordinance (Aug. 7, 1789). The opposite school have inclined to hold the ordinance as still in force. Even as to the Territorial provision of the Constitution, opinions have varied. 83. In the interval of the settlement of the territorial question the affairs of the " league of friendship," known as the United States, had been going from bad to worse, culminat- Difficulties ing in 1786. The public debt amounted in 1783 of the Con-to about $42,000,000, of which $8,000,000 was federation. owed abroad—in Holland, France and Spain. Congress had no power to levy taxes for the payment of interest or principal; it could only make requisitions on the states. In the four years ending in 1786 requisitions had been made for $Io,000,000 and the receipts from them had amounted to but one-fourth of what had been called for. Even the interest on the debt was falling into arrears, and the first instalment of the principal fell due in 1787. To pay this, and subsequent annual instalments of $r,000,000, was quite impossible. Robert Morris, the financier of the War of Independence, resigned in 1783 rather than " be the minister of injustice," hoping thus to force upon the states the necessity of granting taxing powers to Congress. Washing-ton, on retiring from the command-in-chief, wrote a circular letter to the governors of all the states, urging the necessity of granting to Congress some power to provide a national revenue. Congress (April 18,1783) appealed to the states for power to levy specific duties on certain enumerated articles, and 5% on others. It was believed that with these duties and the requisitions, which were now to be met by internal taxation, $2,500,000 per annum could be raised. Some of the states ratified the proposal; others ratified it with modifications; others rejected it, or changed their votes; and it never received the necessary ratification of all the states. The obedience to the requisitions grew more lax. In 1786 a committee of Congress reported that any further reliance on requisitions would be " dishonourable to the understandings of those who entertain such confidence." ' When the total number should reach 25, the legislature itself was to have the power of regulating the number and proportion. Property qualifications were prescribed for electors, representatives and members ot the council. 84. In the states the case was even worse. Some of them had been seduced into issuing paper currency in such profusion that they were almost bankrupt. Great Britain, the in the treaty of peace, had recognized the indePen- St Statetes. dence of the individual states, naming them in order; and her government followed the same system in all its inter-course with its late colonies. Its restrictive system was maintained, and the states, vying with each other for commerce, could adopt no system of counteracting measures. Every possible burden was thus shifted to American commerce; and Congress could do nothing, for, though it asked for the power to regulate commerce for fifteen years, the states refused it. The decisions of the various state courts began to conflict, and there was no power to reconcile them or to prevent the consequences of the divergence. Several states, towards the end of this period, began to prepare or adopt systems of protection of domestic productions or manufactures, aimed at preventing competition by neighbouring states. The Tennessee settlers were in insurrection against the authority of North Carolina; and the Kentucky settlers were disposed to cut loose from Virginia. Poverty, with the rigid execution of process for debt, drove the farmers of western Massachusetts into an insurrection (Shays's Insurrection) which the state had much difficulty in suppressing; and Congress was so incompetent to aid Massachusetts that it was driven to the expedient of imagining an Indian war in that direction, in order to transfer troops thither. Congress itself olCongress.was in danger of disappearance from the scene. The necessity for the votes of nine of the thirteen states for the passage of important measures made the absence of a state's delegation quite as effective as a negative vote. Congress even had to make repeated appeals to obtain a quorum for the ratification of the treaty of peace with Great Britain. In 1784 Congress actually broke up in disgust, and the French minister reported to his government—" There is now in America no general government—neither Congress, nor president, nor head of any one administrative department." Everywhere there were symptoms of a dissolution of the Union. 85. Congress was evidently incompetent to frame a new plan of national government; its members were too dependent on Proposals their states, and would be recalled if they took part for a in framing anything stronger than the articles. Conventlon.The idea of a convention of the states, independent of Congress, was in the minds and mouths of many; Thomas Paine .had suggested it as long ago as his Common Sense pamphlet: " Let a continental conference be held . . . to frame a continental charter . . . fixing the number and manner of choosing members of Congress, members of assembly ... drawing the line of business and jurisdiction between them." To a people as fond of law and the forms of law as the Americans there was a difficulty in the way. The articles had provided that no change should be made in them but by the assent of every state legislature. If the work of such a convention was to be subject to this rule, its success would be no greater than that of Congress; if its plan was to be put into force on the ratification of less than the whole number of states, the step would be more or less revolutionary. In the end the latter course was taken, though not until every other expedient had failed; but the act of taking it showed the underlying consciousness that union, independence and nationality were now inextricably complicated, and that the thirteen had become one in some senses. 86. The country drifted into a convention by a roundabout way. The navigation of Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac needed regulation; and the states of Maryland and Virginia, having plenary power in the matter, appointed delegates to arrange such rules. The delegates met (1785) at Alexandria, Va. (q.v.), and at Washington's house, Mount Vernon. Maryland, in adopting their report, proposed that Pennsylvania and Dela- ware be asked to nominate commissioners, and Convention of 1786. Virginia went further and proposed a meeting of commissioners from all the states to frame commercial regulations for the whole. The convention met (1786) at Annapolis (q.v.), Maryland, but only five states wererepresented, and their delegates adjourned, after recommending another convention at Philadelphia in May 1787. 87. Congress had failed in its last resort—a proposal that the states should grant it the impost power alone; New York's veto had put an end to this last hope. Confessing its helplessness, Congress approved the call for A. second convention 011787. convention; twelve of the states (all but Rhode Island) chose delegates; and the convention met at Philadelphia (May 25, 1787), with an abler body of men than had been seen in Congress since the first two Continental Congresses. . Among others, Virginia sent Washington, James Madison, Edmund Randolph, George Mason and George Wythe; Pennsylvania: Franklin, Robert and Gouverneur Morris and James Wilson; Massachusetts: Rufus King, Elbridge Gerry and Caleb Strong; Connecticut: William S. Johnson, Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth; New York : Alexander Hamilton; New Jersey: William Paterson; and South Carolina the two Pinckneys and John Rutledge. With hardly an exception the fifty-five delegates were clear-headed, moderate men, with positive views of their own and firm purpose, but with a willingness to compromise. 88. Washington was chosen to preside, and the convention began the formation of a new Constitution, instead of proposing changes in the old one. Two parties were formed The vlrglala at once. The Virginia delegates offered a plan plan. (see RANDOLPH, EDMUND), proposing a Congress, of two houses, having power to legislate on national subjects, and to compel the states to fulfil their obligations. This is often spoken of as a " national " plan, but very improperly. It was a " large-state " plan, proposed by those states which had . or hoped for a large population. It meant to base representation in both houses on population, so that the large states could control both of them, and it left. the appointment of the president or other executive and the Federal judges to Congress —so that the whole administration of the new government would fall under large-state control. On behalf of the " small states " Paterson of New Jersey brought Jere jersey in another plan.l. It continued the old Confederation, with its single house and equal state vote, but added the power to regulate commerce and raise a revenue, and to compel the states to obey requisitions. The large states had a general majority of six to five, but the constant dropping off of one or more votes, on minor features, from their side to that of the small states prevented the hasty adoption of any radical measures. Nevertheless, the final collision could not be evaded; the basis of the two plans was in the question of one or two houses, of equal or proportionate state votes, of large-state supremacy or of state equality. In July the large states began to show a disposition to force their plan through, and the small states began to threaten a concerted withdrawal from the convention. 89. The Connecticut delegates, from their first appearance in the convention, had favoured a compromise. They had been trained under the New England system, in which the assemblies were made up of two houses, one The promis Corn-e. se. representing the people of the whole state, according to population, and the other giving an equal representation to the towns. They proposed that the new Congress should be made up of two houses, one representing the states in proportion to their population, the other giving an equal vote to each state. At a deadlock the convention referred the proposition to a committee, and it reported in favour of the Connecticut compromise. Connecticut had been voting in the large-state list, and the votes of her delegates could not be spared from their slender majority; now another of the large states, North Carolina, came over to Connecticut's proposal, and it was adopted. Thus the first great struggle of the convention resulted in a compromise, which took shape in an important feature of the Constitution, the Senate. 9o. The small states were still anxious, in every net' question, to throw as much power as possible into the hands of their 1 A third plan was introduced by Charles Pinckney; for a discussion of this plan see the separate article on PINCKNEY. special representative, the Senate; and that body thus obtained its power to act as an executive council as a restraint The work on the president in appointments and treaties. of the This was the only survival of the first alignment Convention. of parties; but new divisions arose on almost every proposal introduced. The election of the president was given at various times to Congress and to electors chosen by the state legislatures; and the final mode of choice, by electors chosen by the states, was settled only two weeks before the end of the convention, the office of vice-president coming in with it. The opponents and supporters of the slave trade compromised by agreeing not to prohibit it or twenty years. Another compromise included three-fifths of the slaves in enumerating population for representation. This provision gave the slave-holders abnormal power as the number of slaves increased. 91. Any explanation of the system introduced by the Constitution must start with the historical fact that, while the national government was practically suspended, from 1776 until 1789, the only power to which political privileges had been given by the people was the states, and that the state legislatures were, when the convention met, politically omnipotent, with the exception of the few limitations imposed on them by the early state constitutions. The general rule, then, is that the Federal government has only the powers granted to it by the Federal Constitution, while the state has all governmental powers not forbidden to it by the state or the Federal Constitution. But the phrase defining the Federal government's powers is no longer " expressly granted, " as in the Articles of Confederation, but merely " granted, " so that powers necessary to the execution of granted powers belong to the Federal government, even though not directly named in the Constitution. This question of the interpretation or " construction " of the Constitution is at the bottom of real national politics in the United States: the minimizing parties have sought to hold the Federal government to a strict construction of granted powers, while their opponents have sought to widen those powers by a broad construction of them. The strict-construction parties, when they have come into power, have regularly adopted the practice of their opponents, so that construction has pretty steadily broadened. 92. Popular sovereignty, then, is the basis of the American system. But it does not, as does the British system, choose its The Con- legislative body and leave unlimited powers to it. atltutlon. It makes its Constitution ' the permanent medium of its orders or prohibitions to all .branches of the Federal government and to many branches of the state governments: they must do what the Constitution directs and leave undone what it forbids. The people, therefore, are continually laying their commands on their governments; and they have instituted a system of Federal courts to ensure obedience to their commands. A British court must obey the act of parliament; the American court is bound and sworn to obey the Constitution first, and the act of Congress or of the state legislature only so far as it is warranted by the Constitution. But the American court does not deal directly with the act in question; it deals with individuals who have a suit before it. One of these individuals relies on an act of Congress or of a state legislature; the act thus comes before the court for examination; and it supports the act or disregards it as " unconstitutional, " or in violation of the Constitution. If the court is one of high rank or reputation, or one to which a decision may be appealed, as the United States Supreme Court, other courts follow the precedent, and the law falls to the ground. The court does not come into direct conflict with the legislative body; and, where a decision would be apt to produce such a conflict, the practice has been for the court to regard the matter as a " political question " and refuse to consider it. 93. The preamble states that " we, the people of the United States, " establish and ordain the Constitution. Events have shown that it was the people of the whole United States that established the Constitution, but the people of 1787 seem to have inclined to the belief that it was the people of each state for itself. This belief was never changed in the South; and in 1861 the people of that section believed that the ordinances of secession were merely a repeal of the enacting clause by the power which had passed it, the people of the state. An account of the form of government established by the Constitution appears elsewhere (see UNITED STATES: VII.—Constitution and Government, pp. 646 sqq.). 94. The Constitution's leading difference from the Confederation is that it gives the national government power over individuals. The Its Power Federal courts are the principal agent in securing this over Inch- essential power; without them, the Constitution might virtues. easily have been as dismal a failure as the Confederation. It has also been a most important agent in securing to the national government its supremacy over the states. From this point of view the most important provision of the Constitution is the grant of jurisdiction to Federal courts in cases involving the co,nstruc- tion of the Constitution or of laws or treaties made under it. The 25th section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 permitted any Supreme Court justice to grant a writ of error to a state court in a case in which the constitutionality of a Federal law or treaty had been denied, or in which a state law objected to as in violation of the Federal Constitution had been maintained. In such cases, the defeated party had the right to carry the " Federal question " to the Federal courts. It was not until 1816 that the Federal courts undertook to exercise this power; it raised a storm of opposition, but it was maintained, and has made the Constitution what it professed to be—" the supreme law of the land. " Treason was restricted rre ason. to the act of levying war against the United States, or of adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. The states, however, have always asserted their power to punish for treason against them individually. It has never been fully maintained in practice; but the theory had its effect in the secession period. 95. The system of the United States is almost the only national system, in active and successful operation, as to which the exact location of the sovereignty is still a mooted question. The contention of the Calhoun school—that the separate Sovere gnty. states were sovereign before and after the adoption of the Constitution, that the Union was purely voluntary, and that the whole people, or the people of all the other states, had no right to maintain or enforce the Union against any state—has been ended by the Civil War. But that did not decide the location of the sovereignty. The prevalent opinion is still that first formulated by Madison: that the states were sovereign before 1789; that they then gave up a part of their sovereignty to the Federal government ; that the Union and the Constitution were the work of the states, not of the whole people; and that reserved powers are reserved to the people of the states, not to the whole people. The use of the bald phrase " reserved to the people, " not to the people of the several states, in the loth amendment, seems to argue an underlying consciousness, even in 1789, that the whole people of the United States was already a political power quite distinct from the states, or the people of the states; and the tendency of later opinion is in this direction. The restriction to state lines seems to be a self-imposed limitation by the national people, which it might remove, as in 1789, if an emergency should make it necessary. 96. By whatever sovereignty the Constitution was framed and imposed, it was meant only as a scheme in outline, to be filled up afterwards, and from time to time, by legislation. The Details of idea is most plainly carried out in the Federal judiciary : theSystem. the Constitution only directs that there shall be a Supreme Court, and marks out the general jurisdiction of all the courts, leaving Congress, under the restriction of the president's veto power, to build up the system of courts which shall best carry out the design of the Constitution. But the same idea is visible in every department, and it has carried the Constitution safely through a century which has radically altered every other civilized government. It has combined elasticity with the limitations necessary to make democratic government successful over a vast territory, having infinitely diverse interests, and needing, more than almost anything else, positive opportunities for sober second thought by the people. A sudden revolution of popular thought or feeling is enough to change the House of Representatives from top to bottom; it must continue for several years before it, can make a radical change in the Senate, and for years longer before it can carry this change through the judiciary, which holds for life; and all these changes must take place before the full effects upon the laws or Constitution are accomplished. But minor changes are reached in the meantime easily and naturally in the course of legislation. The members of the Convention of 1787 showed their wisdom most plainly in not trying to do too much; if they had done more they would have done far less. 97. The convention adjourned on the 17th of September 1787, having adopted the Constitution. Its last step was a resolution that the Constitution be sent to the Congress of the Confederation, with the recommendation that it be Submission submitted to conventions elected by the people toCoagress. of each state for ratification or rejection; that, if nine states should ratify it, Congress should appoint days for the popular election of electors, and that then the new Congress and president should, " without delay, proceed to execute this Constitution." Congress resolved that the report of the convention be sent to the several legislatures, to be submitted to conventions; and this was all the approval the Constitution ever received from Congress. Both Congress and the convention were careful not to open the dangerous question, How was a government which was not to be changed but by the legislatures of all the states to be entirely supplanted by a different system through the approval of conventions in three-fourths of them? They left such questions to be opened, if at all, in the less public forum of the legislatures. 98. Before the end of the year Delaware, Pennsylvania and New Jersey had ratified; and Georgia, Connecticut and Massachusetts followed during the first two months of 1788. Thus far Federalists the only strong opposition had been in Massa-and Anti- chusetts, a " large state." In it the struggle began Federalists. between the friends and the opponents of the Constitution, with its introduction of a strong Federal power; and it raged in the conventions, legislatures, newspapers and pamphlets. In a classic series of papers, the Federalist, Alexander Hamilton, with the assistance of James Madison and John Jay, explained the new Constitution and defended it. As it was written before the Constitution went into force, it speaks much for the ability of its writers that it has passed into a standard textbook of American constitutional law. 99. The seventh and eighth states—Maryland and South Carolina—ratified in April and May 1788; and, while the con- ventions of Virginia and New York were still wrang- Ratiflca- ling over the great question, the ninth state, New lion. Hampshire, ratified, and the Constitution passed out of theory into fact. The Anti-Federalists of the Virginia and New York conventions offered conditional ratifications of all sorts; but the Federalists stubbornly refused to consider them, and at last, by very slender majorities, these two states ratified. North Carolina refused to ratify the Constitution, and in Rhode Island it was referred to the several towns instead of to a con- vention and was rejected by an overwhelming majority, the Federalists, who advocated the calling of a convention, refrain- ing from voting (§112). Congress named the first Wednesday of January 1789 as the day for the choice of electors, the first Wednesday in February for the choice of president and vice-president, and the first Wednesday in March lnaugura- for the inauguration of the new government, at lion. New York City. The last date fell on the 4th of March, which has been the limit of each president's term since that time. too. When the votes of the electors were counted before Congress, it was found that Washington had been unanimously Fall of the elected president, and that John Adams, standing Confedera- next on the list, was vice-president. Long before Lion. the inauguration the Congress of the Confederation had expired of mere inanition; its attendance simply ran down until (Oct. 21, 1788) its record ceased, and the United States got on without any national government for nearly six months. The struggle for nationality had been successful, and the old order faded out of existence. 1o1. The first census (1790) followed so closely upon the inauguration of the Constitution that the country may fairly be said to have had a population of nearly four millions in 1789. slavery in Something over half a million of these were slaves, of the united African birth or blood. Slavery of this sort had taken States. root in almost all the colonies, its original establishment being everywhere by custom. When the custom had been sufficiently established statutes came in to regulate a relation already existing. But it is not true, as the Dred Scott decision held long afterwards (§ 215), that the belief that slaves were chattels simply, things, not persons, held good at the time of the adoption of the Constitution. Times had changed somewhat. The peculiar language of the Constitution itself, describing a slave as a " person held to service or labour," under the laws of any state, puts the general feeling exactly: slaves were persons from whom the laws of some of the states withheld personal rights for the time. In accordance with this feeling most of the Northern states were on the high road towards abolition of slavery. Vermont had never allowed it. In Massa- Abolition in chusetts it was swept out by a summary court the North. decision that it was irreconcilable with the new state constitution. Other states soon began systems of gradual abolition, which finally extinguished slavery north of Maryland, but so gradually that there were still 18 apprentices for life in New Jersey in 186o, the last remnants of the former slave system. In the new states north of the Ohio slavery was prohibited by the ordinance of 1787 (§81), and the prohibition was maintained in spite of many attempts to get rid of it and introduce slavery. 102. The sentiment of thinking men in the South was exactly the same, or in some cases more bitter from their personal entanglement with the system. Jefferson's language as to slavery is irreconcilable with the chattel notion; eelingin ~ the South no abolitionist agitator ever used warmer language than he as to the evils of slavery; and the expression, " our brethren," used by him of the slaves, is conclusive. Washing-' ton, George Mason and other Southern men were almost as warm against slavery as Jefferson, and there were societies for the abolition of slavery in the South. In the Constitutional convention of 1787 the strongest opposition to an extension of the period of non-interference with the slave trade from 1800 to 1808 came from Virginia, whereas every one of the New England states, in which the trade was an important source of profit, voted for this extension. No thinking man could face with equanimity the future problem of holding a separate race of millions in slavery. Like most slave laws, the laws of the Southern states were harsh: rights were almost absolutely with-held from the slave, and punishments of the severest kind were legal; but the execution of the system was milder than its legal possibilities might lead one to imagine. The country was as yet so completely agricultural that Southern slavery kept all the patriarchal features possible to such a system. 103. Indeed, the whole country was almost exclusively agricultural, and, in spite of every effort to encourage manufactures by state bounties, they formed the meagrest Agriculture, element in the national production. Connecticut, commerce which now teems with manufactures, was just begin- and Mansning the production of tinware and clocks; Rhode factures. Island and Massachusetts were just beginning to work in cotton from models of jennies and Arkwright machinery surreptitiously obtained from England; and other states, beyond local manufactures of paper, glass and iron, were almost entirely agricultural, or were engaged in industries directly dependent on agriculture. Commerce was dependent on agriculture for export and manufactured imports were enough to drown out every other form. 104. There were but five cities in the United States having a population of more than 1o,000-New York (33,000), Phiia•• delphia (28,500), Boston (18,000), Charleston (16,000) and Baltimore (13,00c). The population of the Changes since l790. city of New York is now greater than that of the original thirteen states in 1790; the state of New York has now about twice as many inhabitants as the thirteen had in 1790; and the new states of Ohio and Illinois, which had hardly any white inhabitants in 1789, have each a larger population than the whole thirteen then had. Imports have swollen from $23,000,000 to $1,475,612,580 (1909); exports from $20,000,000 to $1,728,203,271 (1909), since 1790. The revenues of the new government in 1790 were $4,000,000; the expenditures, excluding interest on the public debt, but $1,000,coo; now both the revenues and the expenditures are about $1,000,000,000. It is not easy for the modern American to realize the poverty and weakness of his country at the inauguration of the new system of government, however he may realize the simplicity of the daily life of its people. io5. Outside the cities communication was slow. One stage a week was enough for the connexion between the great cities; and communication elsewhere depended on private The west. conveyance. The Western settlements were just beginning to make the question more serious. Enterprising land companies were the moving force which had impelled the passage of the Ordinance of 1787; and the first column of their settlers was pouring into Ohio and forming connexion with their predecessors in Kentucky and Tennessee. Marietta and Cincinnati had been founded. But the intending settlers were obliged to make the journey down the Ohio river from Pittsburg in bullet-proof flat-boats, for protection against the Indians, and the return trip depended on the use of oars. For more than twenty years these flat-boats were the chief means of river commerce in the West; and in the longer trips, as to New Orleans, the boats were generally broken up at the end and sold for lumber the crew making the trip home on foot or on horseback. John Fitch and others were already experimenting on what was soon to be the steamboat; but the statesman of 1789, looking at the task of keeping under one government a country of such distances, with such difficulties of communication, may be pardoned for having felt anxiety as to the future. To almost all thinking men of the time the Constitution was an experiment, and the unity of the new nation a subject for very serious doubt. ro6. The comparative isolation of the people everywhere, the lack of books, the poverty of the schools and newspapers, were Literature. all influences which worked strongly against any pronounced literary development. Poems, essays and paintings were feeble imitations of European models; history was annalistic, if anything; and the drama hardly existed. In two points the Americans were strong, and had done good work. Such men as Jonathan Edwards had excelled in various departments of theology, and American preaching had reached a high degree of quality and influence; and, in the line of politics, the American state papers rank among the very best of their kind. Having a very clear perception of their political purposes, and having been restricted in study and reading to the great masters of pure and vigorous English, and particularly to the English translators of the Bible, the American leaders came to their work with an English style which could hardly have been improved. The writings of Franklin, Washington, the Adamses, Hamilton, Jefferson, Madison, Jay and others show the secret of their strength in every page. Much the same reasons, with the influences of democracy, brought oratory, as represented by Patrick Henry, Fisher Ames, John Randolph and others, to a point not very far below the mark afterwards reached by Daniel Webster. The effect of these facts on the subsequent development of the country is not often estimated at its full value. All through an immigration of every language and dialect under heaven the English language has been protected in its supremacy by the necessity of going back to the " fathers of the republic " for the first, and often the complete, statement of principles in every great political struggle, social problem or lawsuit. 107. The cession of the " North-West Territory " by Virginia and New York had been followed up by similar cessions by Massachusetts (1785), Connecticut (1786) and South Tennessee until early in 1790, nor Georgia her western claims until 18oz. Settlement in all these regions was still very sparse. The centres of Western settlement, in Tennessee and Kentucky, had become more firmly established, and a new one, in Ohio, had just been begun. The whole western limits of settle- ment of the old thirteen states had moved much nearer their present boundaries; and the acquisition of the Western title, with the liberal policy of organization and government which had been begun, was to have its first clear effects during the first decade of the new government. Almost the only obstacle to its earlier success had been the doubts as to the attitude which the Spanish authorities, at New Orleans and Madrid, would take towards the new settlements. They had already asserted a claim from its mouth up to the Yazoo, and that no American boat should be allowed to sail on this part of it. To the Western settler the Alleghanies and bad roads were enough to cut him off from any other way to a market than down the Mississippi; and it was not easy to restrain him from a forcible defiance of the Spanish claim. The Northern states were willing to allow the Spanish claim for a period of years in return for a commercial treaty; the Southern states and the Western settlers protested angrily; and once more the spectre of dissolution appeared, not to be laid again until the new government had made a treaty with Spain in 1795 (see PINCKNEY, THOMAS), securing common navigation of the Mississippi. 1o8. Contemporary authorities agree that a marked change Socha had come over the people since 1775, and few of Conditions. them seem to think the change one for the better. Many attribute it to the looseness of manners and morals introduced by the French and British soldiers; others to the general effects of war; a few, Tories all, to the demoralizing effects of rebellion. The successful establishment of nationality would be enough to explain most,of it; and if we remember that the new nation had secured its title to a vast western territory, of unknown but rich capacities, which it was now moving to reduce to possession by emigration, it would seem far more strange if the social conditions had not been somewhat disturbed. G.—The Development of Democracy, 1789-18oz. log. All the tendencies of political institutions in the United States had certainly been towards democracy; but it cannot be said that the leading men were hearty or unanimous Democracy in their agreement with this tendency. Not a few in the United of them were pronounced republicans even before states. 1775, but the mass of them had no great objections to a monarchical form of government until the war-spirit had converted them. The Declaration of Independence had been directed rather against the kingsthan against a king. Even after popular sovereignty had pronounced against a king, class spirit was for some time a fair substitute for aristocracy. As often happens, democracy at least thought of a Caesar when it apprehended class control. Certain discontented officers of the Continental Army proposed to Washington that he become king, but he promptly and indignantly put the offer by. The suggestion of a return to monarchy in some form, as a possible road out of the confusion of the Confederation, occurs in the correspondence of some of the leading men; and while the Convention of 1787 was holding its secret sessions a rumour went out that it had decided to offer a crown to an English prince. 110. The state constitutions were democratic, except for property or other restrictions on the right of suffrage, or pro-visions carefully designed to keep the control of at least one house of the state legislature " in the hands of property." The Federal Constitution was so drawn that it would have lent itself kindly either to class control or to democracy. The electoral system of choosing the president and vice-president was altogether anti-democratic, though democracy has conquered it: not an elector, since 1796, has disobeyed the purely moral claim of his party to control his choice. Since the Senate was to be chosen by the state legislatures, " property," if it could retain its influence in those bodies, could control at least one house of Congress. The question whether the Constitution was to have a democratic or an anti-democratic interpretation was to be settled in the next twelve years. I it. The states were a strong factor in the final settlement, from the fact that the Constitution had left to them the control of the elective franchise: they were to make its conditions /nfluence of what each of them saw fit. Religious tests for the right of fm mine suffrage had been quite common in the colonies; property tioa. tests were almost universal. The former disappeared""' shortly after the War of Independence; the latter survived in some of the states far into the constitutional period. But the desire to attract immigration was always a strong impelling induce states, especially frontier states, to make the acquisition of full citizenship and political rights as easy and rapid as possible. This force was not so strong at first as it was after the great stream of immigration began about 1848, but it was enough to tend constantly to the development of democracy. In later times,when state laws allow the immigrant to vote even before the period assigned by Federal laws allows him to become a naturalized citizen, there have been demands for the modification of the ultra state democracy; but no such danger was apprehended in the first decade. 112. The Anti-Federalists had been a political party, but a party with but one principle. The absolute failure of that principle deprived the party of all cohesion; and the Federalists controlled the first two Congresses almost entirely. Their pronounced ability was shown in their organizing measures, which still govern the American system very largely. The departments of state, of the treasury, of war, of justice, and of the post-office were rapidly and successfully organized; acts were passed for the regulation of seamen, commerce, tonnage duties, lighthouses, intercourse with the Indians, Territories, and the militia; a national capital was selected; a national bank was chartered; the national debt was funded, and the state debts were assumed as Limits of sewema ent.Carolina (1787). North Carolina did not cede Settle The miss's- that the Mississippi, was an exclusively Spanish stream sippl River. Organization of the New Government. part of it. The first four years of the new system showed that the states had now to deal with a very different power from the impotent Congress of the Confederation. The new power was even able to exert pressure upon the two states which had not ratified the Constitution, though the pressure was made as gentle as possible. As a first step, the higher duties imposed on imports from foreign countries were expressly directed to apply to imports from North Carolina and Rhode Island. North Carolina having called a second convention, her case was left to the course of nature; and the second convention ratified the Constitution (November 21, 1789). The Rhode Island legislature asked that their state might not be considered altogether foreigners, made their duties agree with those of the new government, and reserved the proceeds for " continental " purposes. Still no further steps were taken. A bill was therefore introduced, directing the president to suspend commercial intercourse with Rhode Island, and to demand from her her share of the continental debt. This was passed by the Senate, and waited but two steps further to become law. Newspaper proposals to divide the little state between her two nearest neighbours were stopped by her ratification of the Constitution (May 29,1790). The " old thirteen " were thus united under completion the Constitution; and yet, so strong is the American of the prejudice for the autonomy of the states that these union. last two were allowed to enter in the full conviction that they did so in the exercise of sovereign freedom of choice. Their entrance, however, was no more involuntary than that of others. If there had been real freedom of choice, nine states would never have ratified: the votes of Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Virginia and New York were only secured by the pressure of powerful minorities in these states, backed by the almost unanimous votes of the others. 113. Protection was begun in the first Tariff Act, whose object, said its preamble, was the protection of domestic manufactures. Hami-toniaaThe duties, however, ranged only from 71 to 1o%, protection. averaging about 82 %. The system, too, had rather a political than an economic basis. Until 1789 the states had controlled the imposition of duties. The separate state feeling was a factor so strong that secession was a possibility which every statesman had to take into account. Hamilton's object, in introducing the system, seems to have been to create a class of manufacturers, running through all the states, but dependent for prosperity on the new Federal government and its tariff. This would be a force which would make strongly against any attempt at secession, or against the tendency to revert to control by state legislatures, even though it based the national idea on a conscious tendency towards the development of classes. The same feeling seems to have been at the bottom of his establishment of a national bank, his assumption of state debts, and most of the general scheme which his influence forced upon the Federalist party. (See HAMILTON, ALEXANDER; and FEDERALIST PARTY.) 114. In forming his cabinet Washington had paid attention to the opposing elements which had united for the temporary The First purpose of ratifying the Constitution. The national cabinet, element was represented by Hamilton, secretary of the treasury, and Henry Knox, secretary of war; the particularist element (using the term to indicate support of the states, not of a state) by Jefferson, secretary of state, and Edmund Randolph, attorney-general. At the end of 1792 matters were in train for the general recognition of the existence of two parties, whose struggles were to decide the course of the Constitution's development. The occasion came in the opening of the following year, when the new nation was first brought into contact with the French Revolution. 115. The controLling tendency of Jefferson and his school was to the maintenance of individual rights at the highest possible The /effer- point, as the Hamilton school was always ready to son School assert the national power to restrict individual rights ofPoiitics, for the general good. Other points of difference are rather symptomatic than essential. The Jefferson school supported the states, in the belief that they were the best bulwarks for individual rights. When the French Revolution began itsusual course in America by agitation for the " rights of man," it met a sympathetic audience in the Jefferson party and a cold and unsympathetic hearing from the Hamilton school of Federalists. The latter were far more interested in securing the full recognition of the power and rights of the nation than in securing the individual against imaginary dangers, as they thought them. For ten years the surface marks of distinction between the two parties were to be connected with the course of events in Europe; but the essence of distinction was not in the surface marks. 116. The new government was not yet four years old; it was not familiar, nor of assured permanency. The only national governments of which Americans had had previous experience were the British government and the toTheSchonlfamnol. Confederation: in the former they had had no share, and the latter had had no power. The only places in which they had had long-continued, full, and familiar experience of self-government were their state governments: these were the only governmental forms which were then distinctly associated in their minds with the general notion of republican government. The governing principle of the Hamilton school, that the construction or interpretation of the terms of the Constitution was to be such as to broaden the powers of the Federal government, necessarily involved a corresponding trenching on the powers of the states. It was natural, then, that the Jefferson school should look on every feature of the Hamilton programme as " anti-republican," meaning, probably, at first no more than opposed to the state system, though the term soon came to imply something of monarchical and, more particularly, of English tendencies. The disposition of the Jefferson school to claim for them-selves a certain peculiar title to the position of " republicans " developed into the appearance of the first Republican, or the Democratic-Republican, party, about 1793. 117. Many of the Federalists were shrewd and active business men, who naturally took prompt advantage of the opportunities which the new system offered. The Republicans party therefore believed and asserted that the whole Differences. Hamilton programme was dictated by selfish or class interest; and they added this to the accusation of monarchical tendencies. These charges, with the fundamental differences of mental constitution, exasperated by the passion which differences as to the French Revolution seemed to carry with them every-where, made the political history of this decade a very unpleasant record. The provision for establishing the national capital on the Potomac (1790) was declared to have been carried by a corrupt bargain; and accusations of corruption were renewed at every opportunity. In 1793 a French agent, The National Edmond Charles Edouard Genet (1765-1834), ap- capital. peared to claim the assistance of the United States Genet's for the French republic, and went to the length of Mission. commissioning privateers and endeavouring to secure recruits, especially for a force which he expected to raise for the conquest of Louisiana from Spain. Washington decided to issue a proclamation of neutrality, the first act of the kind in American history. It was the first indication, also, of the policy which has made the course of every president, with the exception of Polk, a determined leaning to peace, even when the other branches of the government have been intent on war. Genet, however, continued his activities, and made out- The whisky rageous demands upon the government, so that finally Insurrec-Washington demanded and secured (1794) his recall.' tnon. The proclamation of 1793 brought about the first distinctly party feeling; and it was intensified by Washington's charge that popular opposition in western Pennsylvania (1794) to the new excise law (see WHISKY INSURRECTION) had been Admission fomented by the extreme French party. Their name, of Vermont, Democrat, was applied by the Federalists to the whole Kentucky Republican party as a term of contempt, but it was and n-not accepted by the party for some twenty years; lesseeTe then the compound title " Democratic-Republican became, as it 1 Genet, fearing the fate of his fellow Girondists in France, remained in the United States and became a naturalized American citizen. still is, the official title of the party. There was no party opposition, however, to the re-election of Washington in 1792, or to the admission of Vermont (1791), Kentucky (1792) and Tennessee (1796) as new states. 118. The British government had accredited no minister to the United States, and it refused to make any commercial treaty or to give up the forts in the western territory of the United States, through which its agents still exercised a commanding influence over the Indians. In the course of its war with France, the neutral American vessels, without the protection of a national navy, fared badly. A treaty negotiated in 1794 by /ar Chief-Justice John Jay (q.v.) settled these difficulties Treaty. for the following twelve years. But, as it engaged the United States against any intervention in the war on behalf of France, was silent on the subject of the right of search, and agreed to irksome limitations on the commercial privileges of the United States, the Republicans, who were opposed to the negotiation of any treaty at this time with Great Britain, made it very unpopular, and the bitter personal attacks on Washington grew out of it. In spite of occasional Republican successes, the Federalists retained a general control of national Election of affairs; they elected John Adams president in 1796, 1796. though Jefferson was chosen vice-president with him; and the national policy of the Federalists kept the country out of entangling alliances with any of the European belligerents. To the Republicans, and to the French republic, this last point of policy was only a practical intervention against France and against the rights of man. 119. At the end of Washington's administration the French Directory broke off relations with the United States, demanding the abrogation of Jay's treaty and a more pronounced sympathy with France. Adams sent three envoys, C. C. Pinckney (q.v.), John Marshall and Elbridge Gerry (q.v.), to endeavour to re-establish the former relations; they were The met by demands for " money, a great deal of ,' x.Y.Z." money," as a prerequisite to peace. They refused; Mission. their letters home were published,' and the Federalists at last had the opportunity of riding the whirlwind of an intense popular desire for war with France. Intercourse with France was suspended by Congress (1798); the treaties with France were declared at an end; American frigates were authorized to capture French vessels guilty of depredations on American commerce, and the president was authorized to issue letters of marque and reprisal; and an American army was formed, Washington being called from his retirement at Mount Vernon to command it. The war never went beyond Quest-war a few sea-fights, in which the little American navy withFinace,did itself credit, and Napoleon, seizing power the next year, renewed the peace which should never have been broken. But the quasi-war had internal consequences to the young republic which surpassed in interest all its foreign difficulties: it brought on the crisis which settled the development of the United States towards democracy. 120. The reaction in Great Britain against the indefinite " rights of man " had led parliament to pass an alien law, a sedition law suspending the writ of habeas corpus, and an act giving wide and loosely defined powers to magistrates for the dispersion of meetings to petition for redress of Federalists. grievances. The Federalists were in control of a Congress of limited powers; but they were strongly tempted by sympathies and antipathies of every sort to form their programme on the model furnished from England. The measures which they actually passed were based only on that construction of the Constitution which is at the bottom of all American politics; they only tended to force the Constitution into an anti-democratic direction. But it was the fixed belief of their opponents that they meant to go farther, and to secure control by some wholesale measure of political persecution. 121. Three alien laws were passed in June and July 1798. 1 In these letters as published the letters X, Y and Z were substituted for the names of the French agents with whom the American envoys dealt ; and the letters are known as the X Y Z correspondence. The first (repealed in April 1802) raised the number of years necessary for naturalization from five to fourteen. The third (still substantially in force) permitted the arrest or The Alien removal of subjects of any foreign power with and Sedition which the United States should be at war. The Laws. second, which is usually known as the Alien Law, was limited to a term of two years; it permitted the president to arrest or order out of the country any alien whom he should consider dangerous to the country. As many of the Republican editors and local leaders were aliens, this law really put a large part of the 'Republican organization in the power of the president elected by their opponents. The Sedition Law (to be in force until March 18o1 and not renewed) made it a crime, punishable by fine and imprisonment, to publish or print any false, scandalous and malicious writings against the government of the United States, either house of Congress, or the president, or to stir up sedition or opposition to any lawful act of Congress or of the president, or to aid the designs of any foreign power against the United States. In its first form the bill was even more sweeping than this and alarmed the opposition thoroughly. 122. Most of the ability of the country was in the Federalist ranks; the Republicans had but two first-rate men—Jefferson and Madison. In the sudden issue thus forced The between individual rights and national power, Republican Jefferson and Madison could find but one bulwark Opposition. for the individual—the power of the states; and their use of it gave their party a pronounced list to state sovereignty from which it did not recover for years. They objected to the Alien Law on the grounds that aliens were under the jurisdiction of the state, not of the Federal government; that the jurisdiction over them had not been transferred to the Federal government by the Constitution, and that the assumption of it by Congress was a violation of the Constitution's reservation of powers to the states; and, further, because the Constitution reserved to every " person," not to every citizen, the right to a jury trial. They objected to the Sedition Law on the grounds that the Constitution had specified exactly the four crimes for whose punishment Congress was to provide; that criminal libel was not one of them; and that amendment I. forbade Congress to pass any law restricting freedom of speech or of the press. The Federalists asserted a common-law power in Federal judges to punish for libel, and pointed to a provision in the Sedition Law permitting the truth to be given in evidence, as an improvement on the common law, instead of a restriction on liberty. 123. The Republican objections might have been made in court, on the first trial. But the Republican leaders had strong doubts of the impartiality of the Federal judges, who were Federalists. They resolved to entrench the party in the state legislatures. The Virginia legislature in 1798 passed virglnta and a series of resolutions prepared by Madison, Kentucky and the Kentucky legislature in the same year Resolutions. passed a series prepared by Jefferson (see KENTUCKY: History). Neglected or rejected by the other states, they were passed again by their legislatures in 1799, and were for a long time a documentary basis of the Democratic party. The leading idea expressed in both was that the Constitution was a " compact " between the states, and that the powers (the states) which had made the compact had reserved the power to restrain the creature of the compact, the Federal government, whenever it undertook to assume powers not granted to it. Madison's idea seems to have been that the restraint was to be imposed by a second convention of the states. Jefferson's idea is more doubtful; if it meant that the restraint should be imposed by any state which should feel aggrieved, his scheme was merely Calhoun's idea of nullification; but there are some indications that he agreed with Madison. 124. The first Congress of Adams's term of office ended in 1799. Its successor, elected in the heat of the French war excitement, kept the Federalist policy up to its first pitch. Out Effects of of Congress the execution of the objectionable laws the Laws. had taken the shape of political persecution. Men were arrested, tried and punished for writings which the people had been accustomed to consider within legitimate political methods. The Republican leaders made every trial as public as possible, and gained votes constantly, so that the Federalists began to be shy of the very powers which they had sought. Every new election was a storm-signal for the Federalist party; and the danger was increased by schism in their own ranks. 125. Hamilton was now a private citizen of New York; but he had the confidence of his party more largely than its nominal head, the president, and he maintained close and confidential relations with the cabinet which Adams had taken unchanged from Washington. The Hamilton faction saw no way of preserving and consolidating the newly acquired powers of the Federal government but by keeping up and increasing the war feeling against France; Adams had the instinctive leaning of an American president towards peace. Amid cries of wrath and despair from his party he accepted the first overtures of the new Napoleonic government, sent envoys to negotiate a peace, and ordered them to depart for France when they delayed too long. Then, discovering flat treachery in his cabinet, he dismissed it and blurted out a public expression of his feeling that Hamilton and his adherents were " a British faction." Hamilton retorted with a circular letter to his party friends, denouncing the president; the Republicans intercepted it and gave it a wider circulation than its author had intended; and the Hamilton faction tried so to arrange the electoral vote that C. C. Pinckney should be chosen Election of president in 1800 and Adams should be shelved /800. into the vice-presidency. The result depended on the electoral vote of New York; and Aaron Burr, who had introduced the drill and machinery of a modern American political party there, had made the state Republican and secured a majority for the Republican candidates. These (Jefferson and Burr) received the same number of electoral votes (73),1 and the House of Representatives (controlled by the Federalists) was thus called upon to decide which should be president. There was an effort by the Federalists to disappoint the Republicans by making Burr president; but Jefferson obtained that office, Burr becoming vice-president for four years. This disputed election, however, led to the adoption in 1804 of the 12th amendment to the Constitution, which prescribed that each elector should vote separately for president and vice-president, and thus prevent another tie vote of this kind; this amendment, moreover, made very improbable the choice in the future of a president and a vice-president from opposing parties. 126. The " Revolution of 1800" decided the future development of the United States. The new dominant party entered upon its career weighted with the theory of state 'Revolution of 1800 ." sovereignty; and a civil war was necessary before l80o this dogma, put to use again in the service of slavery, could be banished from the American system. But the democratic development never was checked. From that time the interpretation of the Federal Constitution has generally favoured individual rights at the expense of governmental power. As the Republicans obtained control of the states they altered the state constitutions so as to cut out all the arrangements that favoured property or class interests, and reduced political power to the dead level of manhood suffrage. In most of the states outside of New England this process was completed before 1815; but New England tenacity was proof against the advancing revolution until about 1820. For twenty years after its downfall of 1800 the Federalist party maintained its hopeless struggle, and then it faded away into nothing, leaving as its permanent memorial the excellent organization of the Federal government, which its successful rival hardly changed. Its two successors —the Whig and the second Republican party—have also been broad-constructionist parties, but they have admitted democracy as well; the Whig party adopted popular methods at least, and the Republican went further in the direction of individual rights, securing the emancipation of enslaved labour. 1 Adams received 65, Pinckney 64 and John Jay 1. 127. The disputed election of 1800 was decided in the new capital city of Washington, to which the government had just been removed, after having been for ten years at Philadel- The New phia. Its streets and parks existed only on paper. capital. The Capitol had been begun; the Executive Mansion was unfinished, and its audience room was used by Mrs Adams as a drying room for clothes; and the congressmen could hardly find lodgings. The inconveniences were only an exaggeration of the condition of other American cities. Their sanitary conditions were had, and yellow fever and cholera from time to time reduced several of them almost to depopulation. More than once, during this decade, the fever visited Philadelphia and New York. drove out most of the people, and left grass growing in the streets. The communication between the cities was still wretched. The traveller was subject to every danger or annoyance that bad roads, bad carriages, bad horses, bad inns and bad police protection could combine to inflict upon him. But the war with natural obstacles had fairly begun, though it had little prospect of success until steam was brought into use as the ally of man. 128. About this time the term " the West " appears. It meant then the western part of New York, the new territory north of the Ohio, and Kentucky and Tennessee. In The west. settling land boundaries New York had transferred (1786) to Massachusetts, whose claims crossed her territory, the right to (but not jurisdiction over) a large tract of land in central New York, and to another large tract in the Erie basin. The sale of this land had carried population considerably west of the Hudson. After other expeditions against the Ohio Indians had been defeated, one under General Anthony Wayne had compelled them in 1794–95 to give up all the territory now in the state of Ohio. Settlement received a new impetus. Between 1790 and 1800 the population of Ohio had risen from almost nothing to 45,000, that of Tennessee from 36,000 to ro6,000, and that of Kentucky from 74,000 to 221,000–the last-named state now exceeding six of the " old thirteen " in population. The difficulties of the western emigrant, however, were still enormous. He obtained land of his own, fertile land and plenty of it, but little else. The produce of the soil had to be consumed at home, or near it; ready money was scarce and distant products scarcer; and comforts, except the very rudest substitutes of home manufacture, were unobtainable. The new life bore most hardly upon women; and, if the record of woman's share in the work of American colonization could be fully made up, the price paid for the final success would seem enormous. 129. The number of post offices rose during these ten years from 75 to 903, the miles of post routes from 1900 to 21,000, and the revenue from $38,000 to $231,000. These figures seem small in comparison with the 61,158 PostOtf/ce. post offices, 430,738 M. of post routes (besides 943,087 m. of rural delivery routes), and a postal revenue of $191,478,663. in 1908, but the comparison with the figures of 1790 shows a development in which the new Constitution, with its increased security, must have been a factor. 130. The power of Congress to regulate patents was already bearing fruit. Until 1789 this power was in the hands of the states, and the privileges of the inventor were patents. restricted to the territory of the patenting state. Now he had a vast and growing territory within which all the profits of the invention were his own. Twenty patents were issued in 1793, and 23,471 one hundred years afterwards; but one of the inventions of 1793 was Eli Whitney's. cotton gin. 131. When the Constitution was adopted it was not known that the cultivation of cotton could be made profitable in the Southern states. The " roller gin " could clean only 6 lb a day by slave labour. In 1784 eight cotton. bags of cotton, landed in Liverpool from an American ship, were seized on the ground that so much cotton could not be the produce of the United States. Eli Whitney (q.v.) invented the saw-gin, by which the cotton was dragged through parallel wires with openings too narrow to allow the seeds to pass; and one slave could now clean loon lb a day. The exports of cotton leaped from 189,000 lb in Federalist Schism. 1791 to 21,000,000 lb in 18oi, and doubled in three years more. The influence of this one invention, combined with the wonderful series of British inventions which had paved the way for it, can hardly be estimated in its commercial aspects. Its political influences were even wider, but more unhappy. The introduction of the commercial element into the slave system of the South robbed it at once of the patriarchal features which had made it tolerable; while it developed in slave-holders a new disposition to defend a system of slave labour as a " positive good." The abolition societies of the South began to dwindle as soon as the results of Whitney's invention began to be manifest. 132. The development of a class whose profits were merely the extorted natural wages of the black labourer was certain; and its political power was as certain, though it slavery andnever showed itself clearly until after 183o. And Democracy. this class was to have a peculiarly' distorting effect on the political history of the United States. Aristocratic in every sense but one, it was ultra-Democratic (in a purely party sense) in its devotion to state sovereignty, for the legal basis of the slave system was in the laws of the several states. In time, the aristocratic element got control of the party which had originally looked to state rights as a bulwark of individual rights; and the party was finally committed to the employment of its original doctrine for an entirely different purpose—the suppression of the black labourer's wages. H.—Democracy and Nationality, 1801–1829 133• When Jefferson took office in 18oi he succeeded to a task larger than he imagined. His party, ignoring the natural Democracy forces which tied the states together even against and their wills, insisted that the legal basis of the bond Nationality. was in the power of any state to withdraw at will. This was no nationality; and foreign nations naturally refused to take the American national coin at any higher valuation than that at which it was current in its own country. The urgent necessity was for a reconciliation between democracy and nationality; and this was the work of this period. An under-lying sense of all this has led Democratic leaders to call the war of 1812–15 the " Second War of Independence "; the result was as much independence of past ideas as of Great Britain. 134. The first force in the new direction was the acquisition of Louisiana in 1803. Napoleon had acquired it from Spain, Louislaaa. and, fearing an attack upon it by Great Britain, offered it to the United States for $15,000,000. The Constitution gave the Federal government no power to buy and hold territory, and the party was based on a strict construction of the constitution. Possession of power forced the strict-construction party to broaden its ideas, and Louisiana was bought, though Jefferson quieted his conscience by talking for a time of a futile proposal to amend the Constitution so as to grant the necessary power. (See LOUISIANA PURCHASE; and JEFFERSON, THOMAS.) The acquisition of the western Mississippi basin more than doubled the area of the United States, and gave them control of all the great river-systems of central The North America. The difficulties of using these steamboat. rivers were removed almost immediately by Robert Fulton's utilization of steam in navigation (1807). Within four years steamboats were at work on western waters; and thereafter the increase of steam navigation and that of population stimulated one another. The " centre of popu- lation " has been carefully ascertained by the census Centre of Populationauthorities for each decade, and it represents the . westward movement of population very closely. During this period it advanced from about the middle of the state of Maryland to its extreme western limit; that is, the centre of population was in 183o nearly at the place which had been the western limit of population in 1770. 135. Jefferson also laid the basis for a further acquisition in the future by sending an expedition under Meriwether Lewis (q.v.) and William Clark to explore the territory north of the then Spanish territory of California and west of the Rocky Mountains—the " Oregon country " as it was afterwards called. The explorations of this party (1804–1806), with Captain Robert Gray's discovery of the Country"n Columbia river (1792), made the best part of the claims of the United States to the country forty years later. 136. Jefferson was re-elected in 1804,1 serving until March, 1809; his party now controlled almost all the states outside of New England, and could elect almost any one whom it chose to the presidency. Imitating Washington in Election of 1804. refusing a third term of office, Jefferson established more firmly the precedent, not since violated, restricting a president to two terms, though the Constitution contains no such restriction. The great success of his presidency had been the acquisition of Louisiana, which was a violation of his party principles; but all his minor successes were, like this, recognitions of the national sovereignty which he disliked so much. After a short and brilliant naval war the Barbary pirates were reduced to submission (1805). The long-continued control of New Orleans by Spain, and the persistent intrigues of the Spanish authorities, looking towards a separation of the whole western country from the United States, had been ended by the acquisition of Louisiana, and the full details concerning them will probably remain for ever hidden in the secret history of the early West. They had left behind a dangerous ignorance of Federal power and control, of which Aaron Burr (q.v.) took advantage (1806–07). Organizing an expedition in Kentucky and Tennessee, probably for the conquest of the Spanish colony of Mexico, he was arrested on the lower Mississippi and brought back to Virginia. He was acquitted; but the incident opened up a vaster view of the national authority than democracy had yet been able to take. It had been said, forty years before, that Great Britain had long arms, but that three thousand miles was too far to extend them; it was something to know now that the arms of the Federal government were long enough to reach from Washington city to the Mississippi. 137. All the success of Jefferson was confined to his first four years; all his heavy failures were in his second term, in which he and his party as persistently refused to Difficulties recognize or assert the inherent power of the nation with Great in international affairs. The Jay treaty expired in Britain. 1806 by limitation, and American commerce was thereafter left to the course of events, Jefferson refusing to accept the only treaty which the British government was willing to make. All the difficulties which followed may be summed up in a few words: the British government was then the representative of the ancient system of restriction of commerce, and had a powerful navy to enforce its ideas; the American government was endeavouring to force into international recognition the present system of neutral rights and unrestricted commerce, but its suspicious democracy refused to give it a navy sufficient to command respect. The American government apparently expected to gain its objects without the exhibition of anything but moral force. 138. Great Britain was now at war, from time to time, with almost every other nation of Europe. In time of peace European nations followed generally the old restrictive principle of allowing another nation, like the United States, Neutral Commerce. no commercial access to their colonies; but, when they were at war with Great Britain, whose navy controlled the ocean, they were very willing to allow the neutral American merchantmen to carry away their surplus colonial produce. Great Britain had insisted for fifty years that the neutral nation, in such cases, was really intervening in the war as an ally of her enemy; but she had so far modified her claim as to admit that " transhipment," or breaking bulk, in the United States was enough to qualify the commerce for recognition. The neutral nation thus gained a double freight, and grew rich in the traffic; the belligerent nations no longer had commerce afloat for British vessels to capture; and the " frauds of the neutral flags " became a standing subject of complaint among British merchants and naval officers. About 1805 British prize courts 1 Jefferson received 162 electoral votes and his opponent, C. C. Pinckney, only 14. began to disregard transhipment and to condemn American vessels which made the voyage from a European colony to the mother country by way of the United States. This was really a restriction of American commerce to purely American productions, or to commerce with Great Britain direct, with the payment of duties in British ports. 139. The question of expatriation, too, furnished a good many burning grievances. Great Britain maintained the 2 old German rule of perpetual allegiance, though she la- Lion. had modified it by allowing the right of emigration. lion. The United States, founded by immigration, was anxious to establish what Great Britain was not disposed to grant, the right of the subject to divest himself of allegiance by naturalization under a foreign jurisdiction. Four facts thus tended to break off friendly relations: (1) Great Britain's claim to allegiance over American naturalized subjects; (2) her claim to the belligerent right of search of Impress- neutral vessels; (3) her claim of right to impress for ment. her vessels of war her subjects who were seamen wherever found; and (4) the difficulty of distinguishing native-born American from British subjects, even if the right to impress naturalized American subjects were granted. British naval officers even undertook to consider all who spoke the English language as British subjects, unless they could produce proof that they were native-born Americans. The American sailor who lost his papers was thus open to impressment. A particularly flagrant case of seizure of Americans occurred in 1807. On the 27th of June the British ship " Leopard " fired upon the American frigate " Chesapeake," which, after having lost 3 men killed and 18 wounded, hauled down its flag; the British commander then seized four of the " Chesapeake's " crew. This action aroused intense anger throughout the country, and but for the impotence of the government would undoubtedly have led to immediate war. The American government in 1810 published the cases of such impressments since 1803 as numbering over 4000, about one-third of the cases resulting in the discharge of the impressed man; but no one could say how many cases had never been brought to the attention of a government which never did anything more than remonstrate about them. 140. In May 1806 the British government, by orders in council, declared a blockade of the whole continent of Europe from Brest to the Elbe, about 800 m. In November, after the battle of Jena, Napoleon answered by the " Berlin decree," in which he assumed to blockade the British Isles, thus beginning his " continental system." A year later the British government answered by further orders in council, forbidding American trade with any Berlin and country from which the British flag was excluded, Milan allowing direct trade from the United States to Decrees. Sweden only, in American products, and permitting American trade with other parts of Europe only on condition of touching in England and paying duties. Napoleon retorted with the " Milan decree," declaring good prize any vessel which should submit to search by a British ship; but this was evidently a vain fulmination. 141. The Democratic party of the United States was almost exclusively agricultural and had little knowledge of or The Navy. sympathy with commercial interests; it was pledged to the reduction of national expenses and the debt, and did not wish to take up the responsibility for a navy; and, as the section of country most affected by the orders in council, New England, was Federalist, and made up of the active and irreconcilable opposition, a tinge of political feeling could not but colour the decisions of the dominant party. Various ridiculous proposals were considered as substitutes for a necessarily naval war; and perhaps the most ridiculous was adopted. Since the use of non-intercourse agreements as revolutionary weapons against Great Britain, an overweening confidence in such measures had sprung up, and one of them was now resorted to—the embargo of the 22nd of December 1807, forbidding foreign commerce altogether. It was expected to starve Great Britaininto a change of policy; and its effects may be seen by comparing the $20,000,000 exports of 1790, $49,000,000 of 1807 and $9,000,000 of 1808. It does not seem to have struck those who passed the measure that the agricultural districts also might find the change unpleasant; but that was the result, and their complaints reinforced those of New England, and closed Jefferson's second term in a cloud of recognized misfortune. The pressure had been slightly relieved by the substitution of the Non-Intercourse Law of the 1st of March 1809 for the embargo; it prohibited commercial intercourse with Great Britain and France and their dependencies, leaving Non-Inter. other foreign commerce open, prohibited the impor- coarse Law. tation from any quarter of British and French goods, Election and forbade the entrance of British or French vessels, 0118o& public or private, into any port of the United States. Madison, Jefferson's secretary of state, who succeeded Jefferson in 1809, having defeated the Federalist candidate C. C. Pinckney in the election of 1808, assumed in the presidency a burden which was not enviable. New England was in a ferment, and was suspected of designs to resist the restrictive system by force; and the administration did not face the future with confidence. 142. The Non-Intercourse Law was to be in force only " until the end of the next session of Congress " and was to be abandoned as to either belligerent which should abandon its attacks on neutral commerce, and maintained against the other. In 1810 the American government was led to believe that France had abandoned its system. Napoleon continued to enforce it in fact; but his official fiction served its purpose of limiting the non-intercourse for the future to Great Britain, and thus straining relations between that country and the United States still further. The elections of 1811—1812 resulted everywhere in the defeat of " submission men " and in the choice of new members who were determined to resort to war against Great Britain. Henry Clay, John C. Calhoun, William H. Crawford and other new men seized the lead in the two houses of Congress, and forced Madison, it is said, to agree to a declaration of war as a condition of his renomination in 1812 when he defeated De Witt Clinton by an electoral vote of 128 to 89. (See MADISON.) Madison sent to Congress a confidential Election " war message " on the 1st of June and on the 18th of 1812. war was declared. The New England Federalists war with always called it " Mr Madison's war," but the England. president was about the most unwilling participant in it. 143. The national democracy meant to attack Great Britain in Canada, partly to gratify its western constituency, who had been harassed by Indian attacks, asserted to Tippecanoe. have been instigated from Canada. Premonitions of success were drawn from the battle of Tippecanoe, in which William Henry Harrison had defeated in 1811 the north-western league of Indians formed by Tecumseh (q.v.). Between the solidly settled Atlantic states and the Canadian frontier was a wide stretch of unsettled or thinly settled country, which was itself a formidable obstacle to war. Ohio had been Theatre of admitted as a state in 1802, and Louisiana was the war. admitted in 1812; but their admission had been due to the desire to grant them self-government rather than to their full development in population and resources. Cincinnati was a little settlement of 2500 inhabitants; the fringe of settled country ran not very far north of it; and all beyond was a wilderness of which little was known to the authorities. The case was much the same with western New York; the army which was to cross the Niagara river must journey almost all the way from Albany through a very thinly peopled country. It would have been far less costly, as events proved, to have entered at once upon a naval war; but the crusade against Canada had been proclaimed all through Kentucky and the West, and their people were determined to wipe out their old scores before the conclusion of the war. (For the military and naval events of the war see AMERICAN WAR OF 1812.) 144. The war opened with disaster—General William Hull's surrender of Detroit; and disaster attended it for two years. Political appointments to positions in the regular army were Orders in Council. The Embargo. numerous, and such officers were worse than useless. The war department showed no great knowledge, and poverty put its little knowledge out of service. Futile attempts the political officers were weeded out at the end of the year 1813, and Jacob Brown, Winfield Scott, E. W. Ripley and others who had fought their way up were put in command. Then for the first time the men were drilled and brought into effective condition; and two successful battles in 1814—Chippewa and Chippewa Lundy's Lane—threw some glory on the end of and Lundy's the war. So weak were the preparations even for Lane. defence that a British expedition in 1814 met no Washington effective resistance when it landed and burned Burnt. Washington. For some of the disasters the responsibility rested as much, or more, upon the war department as upon the officers and soldiers in the field. 145. The American navy was but a puny adversary for the British navy, which had captured or shut up in port all the other navies of Europe. But the small number of Ameri- officers, gave them one great advantage: the training and discipline of the men, and the equipment of the vessels, had been brought to the very highest point. Captains who could command a vessel but for a short time, yielding her then to another officer who was to take his sea service in rotation, were all ambitious to make their mark during their term. " The art of handling and fighting the old broadside sailing frigate " had been carried in the little American navy to a point which unvarying success and a tendency to fleet-combats had now made far less common among British captains. Altogether the American vessels gave a remarkably good account of themselves. 146. The home dislike to the war had increased steadily with the evidence of incompetent management by the administration. Feeling The Federalists, who had always desired a navy, in New pointed to the naval successes as the best proof of England. folly with which the war had been undertaken and managed. New England Federalists complained that the Federal government utterly neglected the defence of their coast, and that Southern influence was far too strong in national affairs. They showed at every opportunity a disposition to adopt the furthest stretch of state sovereignty, as stated in the Kentucky Resolutions; and every such development urged the national democracy unconsciously further on the road to nationality. When the New England states sent delegates to meet at Hartford, Hartford Conn. (q.v.), and consider their grievances and conventlon.the best remedies—a step perfectly proper on the Democratic theory of a " voluntary Union "—treason was suspected, and a readiness to suppress it by force was plainly shown. The recommendations of the convention came to nothing; but the attitude of the dominant party towards it is one of the symptoms of the manner in which the trials of actual war were steadily reconciling democracy and nationality. The object which Hamilton had sought by high tariffs and the development of national classes had been attained by more natural and healthy means. 147. In April 1814 the first abdication of Napoleon took place, and Great Britain was able to give more attention to her Ameri-Peace can antagonist. The main attack was to be made on Louisiana, the weakest and most distant portion of the Union. A fleet and army were sent thither, but the British assault was completely repulsed (Jan. 8, 1815) by the Americans under Andrew Jackson. Peace had been made at Ghent fifteen days before the battle was fought, but the news of the battle and the peace reached Washington almost together, the former going far to make the latter tolerable. 148. The United States really secured a fairly good treaty. It is true that it said not a word about the questions of impressment, search and neutral rights, the grounds of the war; Great Britain did not abandon her position on any of them. But everybody knew that circumstances had changed. The new naval power whose frigates alone in the past twenty years had shown their ability to fight English frigates on equal terms was not likelyto be troubled in future with the question of impressment; and in fact, while not renouncing the right, the British government no longer attempted to enforce it. The navy, it must be confessed, was the force which had at last given the United States a recognized and cordial acceptance in the family of nations; it had solved the problem of the reconciliation of democracy and nationality. 149. The remainder of this period is one of the barrenest in American history. The opposition of the Federalist party to the war completed the measure of its unpopularity, and Extinction it had only a perfunctory existence for a few years of the longer. Scandal, intrigue and personal criticism Federalist became the most marked characteristics of Ameri- Ply. can politics until the dominant party broke at the end of the period, and real party conflict was renewed. But the seeds of the final disruption are visible from the peace of 1814. The old-fashioned Republicans looked with intense suspicion on the new form of Republicanism generated by the war, a type which instinctively bent its energies toward the further development of national power. Clay was the natural leader of the new Democracy; but John Quincy Adams and others of Federalist antecedents or leanings took to the new doctrines kindly; and even Calhoun, Crawford and others of the Southern interest were at first strongly inclined to support them. One of the first effects was the revival of protection and of a national bank. 15o. The charter of the national bank had expired in 1811, and the dominant party had refused to recharter it. The attempt to carry on the war by loans resulted in almost a bank-Bank of the ruptcy and in a complete inability to act efficiently. united As soon as peace gave time for consideration, a second states. bank was chartered (April ro, 1816) for twenty years, with a capital of $35,000,000, one-fifth of which was to be sub-scribed for by the national government. It was to have the custody of the government revenues, but the secretary of the treasury could divert the revenues to other custodians, giving his reasons for such action to Congress. 151. Protection was advocated again on national grounds, but not quite on those which had moved Hamilton. The additional receipts were now to be expended for fortifications Protection. and other national defences, and for national roads and canals, the latter to be considered solely as military measures, with an incidental benefit to the people. Business distress among the people gave additional force to the proposal. The war and blockade had been an active form of protection, under which American manufactures had sprung up in great abundance. As soon as peace was made English manufacturers drove their American rivals out of business or reduced them to desperate straits. Their cries for relief had a double effect. They gave the spur to the nationalizing advocates of protection, and, as most of the manufacturers were in New England or New York, they developed in the citadel of Federalism a class which looked for help to a Republican Congress, and was therefore bound to oppose the Federalist party. This was the main force which brought New England into the Republican Manufacfold before 1825. An increase in the number of tunes. spindles from 8o,000 in 1811 to 500,000 in 1815, and in cotton consumption from 500 bales in x800 to 90,000 in 1815, the rise of manufacturing towns, and the rapid development of the mechanical tendencies of a people who had been hitherto almost exclusively agricultural, were influences which were to be reckoned with in the politics of a democratic country. 152. The tariff of 1816 imposed a duty of about 25 % on imports of cotton and woollen goods, and specific duties on iron imports, except pig-iron, on which there was an ad valorem Tariff of duty of 20%. In 1818 this duty also was made 1816• specific (5o cents a cwt.). The ad valorem duties carried most of the manufacturers through the financial crisis of 1818-1819, but the iron duties were less satisfactory. In English manufacture the substitution of coke for charcoal in iron production led to continual decrease in price. As the price went down the specific duties were continually increasing the absolute amount of protection. Thus spared the necessity for improvements Disaster at invasion were followed by defeat or abortion, until by Land. stare of can vessels, with the superabundance of trained the Navy. in production, the American manufacturers felt English competition more keenly as the years went by, and called for more protection. 153. James Monroe (q.v.) succeeded Madison as president in 1817, and, re-elected with hardly any opposition in 1820, he "Bra of served until 1825.1 So complete was the supremacy Good of the Republican party that this is often called Feeling." " the era of good feeling." It came to an end when a successor to Monroe was to be elected; the two sections of the dominant party then had their first opportunity for open struggle. During Monroe's two terms of office the nationalizing party developed the policy on which it proposed to manage national affairs. This was largely the product of the continually swelling western movement of population. The influence of the steamboat was felt more and more every year, and the want of a similar improvement in land transport was correspondingly evident. The attention drawn to western New York by the war had filled that part of the state with a new population. The southern Indians had been completely overthrown by Andrew Jackson during the War of 1812, and forced to cede their lands. Admission The admission of the new states of Indiana (1816), of New Mississippi (1817), Illinois (1818), Alabama (1819), States. Maine (182o) and Missouri (1821)—all but Maine the product and evidence of western growth—were the immediate results of the development consequent upon the war. All the territory east of the Mississippi, except the northern part of the North-West Territory, was now formed into self-governing states; the state system had crossed the Mississippi; all that was needed for further development was the locomotive engine. The four millions of 1790 had grown into thirteen millions in 183o; and there was a steady increase of one-third in each decade. 154. The urgent demand of western settlers for some road to a market led to a variety of schemes to facilitate intercourse Brie canal. between the East and the West—the most successful being that completed in New York in 1825, the Erie Canal. The Hudson river forms the great natural breach in the barrier range which runs parallel to the Atlantic coast. When the traveller has passed up the Hudson through that range he sees before him a vast champaign country extending westward to the Great Lakes, and perfectly adapted by nature for a canal. Such a canal, to turn western traffic into the lake rivers and through the lakes, the canal, and the Hudson to New York City, was begun by the state through the influence of De Witt Clinton, was derisively called " Clinton's big ditch " until its completion, and laid the foundations for the great commercial prosperity of New York state and city. Long before it was finished the evident certainty of its success had seduced other states into far less successful enterprises of the kind and had established as a nationalizing policy the combination of high tariffs and expenditures for internal improvements which was long known as the " American system." 2 The tariffs of duties on The imports were to be carried as high as revenue results ••American would justify; within this limit the duties were System." to be defined for purposes of protection; and the superabundant revenues were to be expended on enterprises which would tend to aid the people in their efforts to subdue the continent. Protection was now to be for national benefit, not for the benefit of classes. Western farmers were to have manufacturing towns at their doors, as markets for the surplus which 1 In 1816 Monroe received 183 electoral votes and his opponent, Rufus King,34; in 1820 Monroe received 231 and his opponent, John Quincy Adams, 1. 2 For a generation the making of " internal improvements " by the Federal government was an issue of great political importance. In 1806 Congress made an appropriation for the National or Cumberland Road, eventually constructed from Fort Cumberland, Md., to Vandalia, Ill. The policy of making such improvements was opposed on the ground that the Constitution gave to the Federal government no power to make them, that it was not an "enumerated power," and that such improvements were not.a " necessary and proper " means of carrying out any of the enumerated powers. Others argued that the Federal government might constitutionally make such improvements, but could not exercise jurisdiction over them when -.ade.had hitherto been rotting on their farms; competition among manufacturers was to keep down prices; migration to all the new advantages of the West was to be made easy at national expense; and Henry Clay's eloquence was to commend the whole policy to the people. The old Democracy, particularly in the South, insisted that the whole scheme really had its basis in benefits to classes, that its communistic features were not such as the Constitution meant to cover by its grant of power to Congress to levy taxation for the general welfare, and that any such legislation would be unconstitutional. The dissatisfaction in the South rose higher when the tariffs were increased Tariffs of in 1824 and 1828. The proportion of customs 1824 and revenue to dutiable imports rose to 37% in 1825 1828. and to 44% in 1829; and the ratio to aggregate imports to 33% in 1825 and 37% in 1829. As yet, Southern dissatisfaction showed itself only in resolutions of state legislatures. 155• In the sudden development of the new nation circumstances had conspired to give social forces an abnormally materialistic cast, and this had strongly influenced the expression of the national life. Its literature and its art had amounted to little, for the American people were still engaged in the fiercest of warfare against natural difficulties, which absorbed all their energies. 156. In international relations the action of the government was strong, quiet and self-respecting. Its first weighty action took place in 1823. It had become pretty evident that the Holy Alliance, in addition to its interventions in Europe to suppress popular risings, meant to aid Spain in bringing her revolted South American colonies to obedience. Great Britain had been drifting steadily away from the alliance, and George Canning, the new secretary, determined to call in the weight of the transatlantic power as a check upon it. A hint to the American minister was followed by a few pregnant The Mo passages in Monroe's annual message in December. Doe rine.roe " We could not view," he said, " any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them [the South American states], or controlling in any other manner their destiny by any European power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States." If both the United States and Great Britain were to take this ground the fate of a fleet sent by the Alliance across the Atlantic was not in much doubt, and the project was at once given up. 157. It was supposed at the time that Spain might transfer her colonial claims to some stronger power; and Monroe therefore said that " the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintained, are hence-forth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers." This declaration and that quoted above constitute together the " Monroe doctrine " as originally proclaimed. The doctrine has remained the rule of foreign intercourse for all American parties. Added to the already established refusal of the United States to become entangled in any European wars or alliances, it has separated Europe and America to their common, advantage. (See MONROE

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click and select "copy." Paste it into a website, email, or other HTML document.