The Life of George Washington, Vol. 4 (of 5)
J >> John Marshall >> The Life of George Washington, Vol. 4 (of 5)Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30
CHAPTER IV.
Differences between Great Britain and the United States....
Mr. Adams appointed minister to Great Britain....
Discontents excited by the commercial regulations of
Britain.... Parties in the United States.... The convention
at Annapolis.... Virginia appoints deputies to a convention
at Philadelphia.... General Washington chosen one of
them.... Insurrection at Massachusetts.... Convention at
Philadelphia.... A form of government submitted to the
respective states, as ratified by eleven of them....
Correspondence of General Washington respecting the chief
magistracy.... He is elected president.... Meeting of the
first congress.
{1783 to 1787}
While the friends of the national government were making these
unavailing efforts to invest it with a revenue which might enable it
to preserve the national faith, many causes concurred to prepare the
public mind for some great and radical change in the political system
of America.
[Sidenote: Misunderstandings between Great Britain and the United
States.]
Scarcely had the war of the revolution terminated, when the United
States and Great Britain reciprocally charged each other with
violations of the treaty of peace. On the construction of that part of
the seventh article which stipulates against the "destruction or
carrying away of any negroes, or other property of the American
inhabitants," a serious difference of opinion prevailed which could
not be easily accommodated. As men seldom allow much weight to the
reasoning of an adversary, the construction put upon that article by
the cabinet of London was generally treated in America as a mere
evasion; and the removal of the negroes who had joined the British
army on the faith of a proclamation offering them freedom, was
considered as a flagrant breach of faith. In addition to this
circumstance, the troops of his Britannic Majesty still retained
possession of the posts on the American side of the great lakes. As
those posts gave their possessors a decided influence over the warlike
tribes of Indians in their neighbourhood, this was a subject to which
the United States were peculiarly sensible.
On the other hand, the United States were charged with infringing the
fourth, fifth, and sixth articles, which contain agreements respecting
the payment of debts, the confiscation of property, and prosecution of
individuals for the part taken by them during the war.
On the 14th of January, 1784, the day on which the definitive articles
were ratified, congress passed a resolution containing a
recommendation in the words of the treaty, respecting confiscated
property, which was transmitted without delay to the several states.
They considered this resolution as merely formal; and contended that
neither the American nor the British government expected from it any
beneficial results. But other stipulations which are explicit, the
performance of which was not to rest on the recommendation of the
government, especially that respecting the payment of debts, were also
neglected. These causes of mutual complaint being permitted to rankle
for some time in the bosoms of both nations, produced a considerable
degree of irritation. The British merchants had large credits in
America. Those engaged in the colonial trade had been nearly ruined by
the rupture between the two countries; and, without taking into the
account the embarrassments in which the war had involved their
debtors, they calculated, after the restoration of peace, on the
prompt collection of the vast sums which were due to them. But the
impediments to the recovery of debts were, in many instances,
permitted to remain; and the dispositions manifested by those states
in which they were chiefly due, did not authorize a belief that any
favourable change of measures was about to take place. The complaints
of the creditors were loud and incessant. They openly charged the
American government with violating the most solemn obligations which
public and private contract could create; and this charge affected the
national character the more seriously, because the terms of the treaty
were universally deemed highly advantageous to the United States. The
recriminations on the part of individuals in America, were also
uttered with the angry vehemence of men who believe themselves to be
suffering unprovoked injuries. The negroes in possession of the
British armies at the restoration of peace, belonged, in many cases,
to actual debtors; and in all, to persons who required the labour of
which they were thus deprived, to repair the multiplied losses
produced by the war. To the detention of the posts on the lakes was
ascribed the hostile temper manifested by the Indians; and thus, to
the indignity of permitting a foreign power to maintain garrisons
within the limits of the nation, were superadded the murders
perpetrated by the savages, and the consequent difficulty of settling
the fertile and vacant lands of the west.[28] On the north-eastern
frontier too, the British were charged with making encroachments on
the territory of the United States. On that side, the river St. Croix,
from its source to its mouth in the bay of Passamaquoddy, is the
boundary between the two nations. Three rivers of that name empty into
the bay. The Americans claimed the most eastern, as the real St.
Croix, while settlements were actually made under the authority of the
government of Nova Scotia to the middle river, and the town of St.
Andrews was established on its banks.
[Footnote 28: See note, No. III. at the end of the volume.]
[Sidenote: Mr. Adams appointed to negotiate with the British cabinet.]
But the cause of most extensive disquiet was the rigorous commercial
system pursued by Great Britain. While colonists, the Americans had
carried on a free and gainful trade with the British West Indies.
Those ports were closed against them as citizens of an independent
state; and their accustomed intercourse with other parts of the empire
also was interrupted by the navigation act. To explore new channels
for the commerce of the nation was, in the actual state of things,
opposed by obstacles which almost discouraged the attempt. On every
side they met with rigorous and unlooked for restrictions. Their trade
with the colonies of other powers, as well as with those of England,
was prohibited; and in all the ports of Europe they encountered
regulations which were extremely embarrassing. From the Mediterranean,
they were excluded by the Barbary powers, whose hostility they had no
force to subdue, and whose friendship they had no money to purchase.
Thus, the characteristic enterprise of their merchants, which, in
better times, has displayed their flag in every ocean, was then in a
great measure restrained from exerting itself by the scantiness of
their means. These commercial difficulties suggested the idea of
compelling Great Britain to relax the rigour of her system, by
opposing it with regulations equally restrictive; but to render
success in such a conflict possible, it was necessary that the whole
power of regulating commerce should reside in a single legislature.
Few were so sanguine as to hope that thirteen independent governments,
jealous of each other, could be induced to concur for a length of
time, in measures capable of producing the desired effect. With many,
therefore, the desire of counteracting a system which appeared to them
so injurious, triumphed over their attachment to state sovereignty;
and the converts to the opinion that congress ought to be empowered to
regulate trade, were daily multiplied. Meanwhile, the United States
were unremitting in their endeavours to form commercial treaties in
Europe. Three commissioners had been appointed for that purpose; and
at length, as the trade with England was peculiarly important, and the
growing misunderstandings between the two countries threatened serious
consequences should their adjustment be much longer delayed, Mr. John
Adams was appointed minister plenipotentiary to the court of St.
James. His endeavours to form a commercial treaty were not successful.
His overtures were declined by the cabinet of London, because the
government of the United States was unable to secure the observance of
any general commercial regulations; and it was deemed unwise to enter
into stipulations which could not be of reciprocal obligation. In
fact, it is not probable that, had even this difficulty been
surmounted, Britain could have been induced to grant advantages that
would have been satisfactory to America. The latter expected great
relaxations of the navigation act, and a free admission into the
colonies of the former; and believed its commerce of sufficient
importance to obtain these objects, if it could be regulated by a
single legislature. The reflecting part of America did not require
this additional evidence of the sacrifice which had been made of
national interest on the altars of state jealousy, to demonstrate the
defectiveness of the existing system. On the mind of no person had
this impression been more strongly made, than on that of General
Washington. His extensive correspondence bears ample testimony to the
solicitude with which he contemplated the proceedings of the states on
this interesting subject.
The opinion he sought to inculcate was, that the trade between the
United States and Great Britain was equally important to each; and
therefore, that a commercial intercourse between the two nations might
be established on equal terms, if the political arrangements in
America would enable its government to guard its interests; but
without such arrangements, those interests could not be protected, and
America must appear in a very contemptible point of view to those with
whom she was endeavouring to form commercial treaties, without
possessing the means of carrying them into effect:--who "must see and
feel that the union, or the states individually are sovereign as best
suits their purposes:--in a word, that we are one nation to day, and
thirteen to-morrow. Who," he added, "will treat with us on such
terms?"
About this time, General Washington received a long and affectionate
letter from the Marquis de Lafayette, who had just returned from a
tour through the north of Europe. In communicating the occurrences at
the courts he had visited, and especially at that of Prussia, whose
aged and distinguished monarch, uniting the acquirements of the
scholar and the statesman with the most profound skill in the art of
war, could confer either literary or military fame, he dwelt with
enthusiasm on the plaudits which were universally bestowed on his
military patron and paternal friend. "I wish," he added, "the other
sentiments I have had occasion to discover with respect to America,
were equally satisfactory with those that are personal to yourself. I
need not say that the spirit, the firmness, with which the revolution
was conducted, has excited universal admiration:--That every friend to
the rights of mankind is an enthusiast for the principles on which
those constitutions are built:--but I have often had the mortification
to hear, that the want of powers in congress, of union between the
states, of energy in their government, would make the confederation
very insignificant. By their conduct in the revolution," he added,
"the citizens of America have commanded the respect of the world; but
it grieves me to think they will in a measure lose it, unless they
strengthen the confederation, give congress power to regulate their
trade, pay off their debt, or at least the interest of it, establish a
well regulated militia, and, in a word, complete all those measures
which you have recommended to them."
"Unhappily for us," said the general in reply, "though the reports you
mention are greatly exaggerated, our conduct has laid the foundation
for them. It is one of the evils of democratic governments, that the
people, not always seeing, and frequently misled, must often feel
before they act right. But evils of this nature seldom fail to work
their own cure. It is to be lamented, nevertheless, that the remedies
are so slow, and that those who wish to apply them seasonably, are not
attended to before they suffer in person, in interest, and in
reputation. I am not without hopes that matters will soon take a
favourable turn in the federal constitution. The discerning part of
the community have long since seen the necessity of giving adequate
powers to congress for national purposes, and those of a different
description must yield to it ere long."
[Sidenote: Discontents of the Americans against the commercial
regulations of Britain.]
While the recommendation of the 30th of April, 1784, was before the
states, many causes contributed to diffuse through the community such
a general dissatisfaction with the existing state of things, as to
prepare the way for some essential change in the American system. In
the course of the long war which had been carried on in the bosom of
their country, the people of the United States had been greatly
impoverished. Their property had been seized for the support of both
armies; and much of their labour had been drawn from agriculture for
the performance of military service. The naval power of their enemy
had almost annihilated their commerce; from which resulted the
two-fold calamity, that imported commodities were enhanced to an
enormous price, while those for exportation were reduced much below
their ordinary value. The inevitable consequence was, that those
consumable articles which habit had rendered necessary, were
exhausted; and peace found the American people, not only destitute of
the elegancies, and even of the conveniences of life, but also without
the means of procuring them, otherwise than by anticipating the
proceeds of future industry. On opening their ports, an immense
quantity of foreign merchandise was introduced into the country, and
they were tempted by the sudden cheapness of imported goods, and by
their own wants, to purchase beyond their capacities for payment. Into
this indiscretion, they were in some measure beguiled by their own
sanguine calculations on the value which a free trade would bestow on
the produce of their soil, and by a reliance on those evidences of the
public debt which were in the hands of most of them. So extravagantly
too did many estimate the temptation which equal liberty and vacant
lands would hold out to emigrants from the old world, as to entertain
the opinion that Europe was about to empty itself into America, and
that the United States would derive from that source such an increase
of population, as would enhance their lands to a price heretofore not
even conjectured. Co-operating with the cause last mentioned, was the
impression which had been made by paper money on public morals, and on
public opinion. It had not escaped observation that every purchaser on
credit, however excessive the price might apparently be, had not only
been relieved by the depreciation, but had derived great gains from
his contract. Speculating on a similar course of things, many
individuals had made extensive purchases at high prices; and had thus
contributed to continue for a time, the deception imposed on
themselves by those who supposed that the revolution was a talisman,
whose magic powers were capable of changing the nature of things. The
delusive hopes created by these visionary calculations were soon
dissipated, and a great proportion of the inhabitants found themselves
involved in debts they were unable to discharge. One of the
consequences resulting from this unprosperous state of things was a
general discontent with the course of trade. It had commenced with the
native merchants of the north, who found themselves incapable of
contending in their own ports with foreigners; and was soon
communicated to others. The gazettes of Boston contained some very
animated and angry addresses, which produced resolutions for the
government of the citizens of that town, applications to their state
legislature, a petition to congress, and a circular letter to the
merchants of the several sea-ports throughout the United States. After
detailing the disadvantages under which the trade and navigation of
America laboured, and expressing their confidence that the necessary
powers to the federal government would be soon, if not already,
delegated, the petition to congress thus concludes: "Impressed with
these ideas, your petitioners beg leave to request of the very august
body which they have now the honour to address, that the numerous
impositions of the British, on the trade and exports of these states,
may be forthwith contravened by similar expedients on our part: else
may it please your excellency and honours, the commerce of this
country, and of consequence its wealth, and perhaps the union itself,
may become victims to the artifice of a nation whose arms have been in
vain exerted to accomplish the ruin of America."
The merchants of the city of Philadelphia presented a memorial to the
legislature of that state, in which, after lamenting it as a
fundamental defect in the constitution that full and entire power over
the commerce of the United States had not been originally vested in
congress, "as no concern common to many could be conducted to a good
end, but by a unity of councils;" they say, "hence it is that the
intercourses of the states are liable to be perplexed and injured by
various and discordant regulations, instead of that harmony of
measures on which the particular, as well as general interests depend;
productive of mutual disgusts, and alienation among the several
members of the empire.
"But the more certain inconveniences foreseen and now experimentally
felt, flow from the unequal footing this circumstance puts us on with
other nations, and by which we stand in a very singular and
disadvantageous situation; for while the whole of our trade is laid
open to these nations, they are at liberty to limit us to such
branches of theirs as interest or policy may dictate:--unrestrained by
any apprehensions, as long as the power remains severally with the
states, of being met and opposed by any consistent and effectual
restrictions on our part."
This memorial prayed that the legislature would endeavour to procure
from congress, a recommendation to the several states, to vest in that
body the necessary powers over the commerce of the United States.
It was immediately taken into consideration, and resolutions were
passed conforming to its prayer. Similar applications were made by
other commercial towns.
From these proceedings, and from the general representations made by
the American merchants, General Washington had augured the most happy
effects.
In a letter to the Marquis de Lafayette, he thus expressed his hope of
the consequences which would attend the efforts then making to enlarge
the powers of congress. "However unimportant America may be considered
at present, and however Britain may affect to despise her trade, there
will assuredly come a day when this country will have some weight in
the scale of empires."
But a concurrence of the states in granting to the general government
the beneficial powers in question, was not so near being effected as
was hoped by its friends. A resolution was moved in congress,
recommending it to the several states to vest in that body full
authority to regulate their commerce, both external and internal, and
to impose such duties as might be necessary for that purpose. This
power was to be fettered with several extraordinary limitations, which
might render it more acceptable to the governments who were asked to
bestow it, among which was a provision that the duties should be
"collectible under the authority, and accrue to the use of the state
in which the same should be made payable." Notwithstanding these
restrictions, marking the keen sighted jealousy with which any
diminution of state sovereignty was watched, this resolution
encountered much opposition even in congress.
During these transactions, the public attention was called to another
subject which served to impress still more powerfully on every
reflecting mind, the necessity of enlarging the powers of the general
government, were it only to give efficacy to those which in theory it
already possessed.
The uneasiness occasioned by the infractions of the treaty of peace on
the part of Great Britain, has been already noticed. To obtain its
complete execution, constituted one of the objects for which Mr. Adams
had been deputed to the court of St. James. A memorial presented by
that minister in December, 1785, urging the complaints of America, and
pressing for a full compliance with the treaty, was answered by an
enumeration of the violations of that compact on the part of the
United States. The Marquis of Carmarthen acknowledged explicitly the
obligation created by the seventh article to withdraw the British
garrisons from every post within the United States; but insisted that
the obligation created by the fourth article, to remove every lawful
impediment to the recovery of _bona fide_ debts, was equally clear and
explicit.
"The engagements entered into by a treaty ought," he said, "to be
mutual, and equally binding on the respective contracting parties. It
would, therefore, be the height of folly as well as injustice, to
suppose one party alone obliged to a strict observance of the public
faith, while the other might remain free to deviate from its own
engagements as often as convenience might render such deviation
necessary, though at the expense of its own credit and importance."
He concluded with the assurance, "that whenever America should
manifest a real determination to fulfil her part of the treaty, Great
Britain would not hesitate to prove her sincerity to co-operate in
whatever points depended upon her, for carrying every article of it
into real and complete effect."
This letter was accompanied by a statement of the infractions of the
fourth article.
Copies of both documents were immediately transmitted by Mr. Adams to
congress, by whom they were referred to Mr. Jay, the secretary for
foreign affairs. The report of that upright minister did not, by
contravening facts, affect to exculpate his country. "Some of the
facts," said he in a letter to General Washington, written after
permission to communicate the papers had been given, "are inaccurately
stated and improperly coloured; but it is too true that the treaty has
been violated. On such occasions, I think it better fairly to confess
and correct errors, than attempt to deceive ourselves and others, by
fallacious though plausible palliations and excuses.
"To oppose popular prejudices, to censure the proceedings and expose
the impropriety of states, is an unpleasant task, but it must be
done."[29]
[Footnote 29: The facts relative to this negotiation were
stated in the correspondence of General Washington. The
statement is supported by the Secret Journals of Congress,
vol. 4, p. 329, and those which follow.]
That the United States might with reason be required to fulfil the
treaty before they could entitle themselves to demand a strict
performance of it on the part of Great Britain, was a position the
propriety of which they were prevented from contesting by the
miserably defective organization of the government. If their treaties
were obligatory in theory, the inability of congress to enforce their
execution had been demonstrated in practice. Restrained by this defect
in the constitution from insisting that the evacuation of the western
posts should precede the removal of the impediments to the _bona fide_
execution of the treaty on the part of America, government exerted its
earnest endeavours to prevail on the several states to repeal all
existing laws which might be repugnant to that compact. The
resolutions which were passed on that subject, and the circular
letters which accompanied them to the several governors, contain
arguments which ought to have demonstrated to all, the constitutional
obligation of a treaty negotiated under the authority of congress, and
the real policy, as well as the moral duty of faithfully executing
that which had been formed with Great Britain. To the deep
mortification of those who respected the character of the nation,
these earnest representations did not produce the effect which was
expected from them. "It was impolitic and unfortunate, if not unjust
in these states," said General Washington to a member of congress by
whom the objectionable conduct of America was first intimated to him,
"to pass laws which by fair construction might be considered as
infractions of the treaty of peace. It is good policy at all times to
place one's adversary in the wrong. Had we observed good faith, and
the western posts had been withheld from us by Great Britain, we might
have appealed to God and man for justice."
"What a misfortune it is," said he in reply to the secretary for
foreign affairs, "that the British should have so well grounded a
pretext for their palpable infractions, and what a disgraceful part,
out of the choice of difficulties before us, are we to act!"