 |
The surrender of Cornwallis tipped the scale. Lord North, when he heard the news, paced the room in agony, exclaiming again and again, "O God, it is all over!" The House of Commons, without even a division, resolved to "consider as enemies to His Majesty and the country" all who should advise a further prosecution of the war. North resigned, and Shelburne, Secretary of State in the new ministry, hastened to open peace negotiations with Franklin at Paris.
Benjamin Franklin.
Benjamin Franklin, now venerable with years, had been doing at the court of Versailles a work hardly less important than that of Washington on the battlefields of America. By the simple grace and dignity of his manners, by his large good sense and freedom of thought, by his fame as a scientific discoverer, above all by his consummate tact in the management of men, the whilom printer, king's postmaster-general for America, discoverer, London colonial agent, delegate in the Continental Congress, and signer of the Declaration of Independence, had completely captivated elegant, free-thinking France. Learned and common folk, the sober and the frivolous alike, swore by Franklin. Snuff-boxes, furniture, dishes, even stoves, were gotten up a la Franklin. The old man's portrait was in every house. That the French Government, in spite of a monarch who was half afraid of the rising nation beyond sea, had given America her hearty support, was in no small measure due to the influence of Franklin. And his skill in diplomacy was of the greatest value in the negotiations now pending.
These were necessarily long and tedious, but Jay, Franklin's colleague, made them needlessly so by his finical refusal to treat till England had acknowledged our independence by a separate act. This, indeed, jeopardized peace itself, since Shelburne's days of ministerial power were closing, and his successor was sure to be less our friend. Jay at last receded, a compromise being arrived at by which the treaty was to open with a virtual recognition of independence in acknowledging Adams, Franklin, and Jay as "plenipotentiaries," that is, agents of a sovereign power. Boundaries, fishery rights, and the treatment of loyalists and their property were the chief bones of contention.
As the negotiations wore on it became apparent that Spain and France, now that their vengeance was sated against England by our independence, were more unfriendly to our territorial enlargement than England itself. There still exists a map on which Spain's minister had indicated what he wished to make our western bound. The line follows nearly the meridian of Pittsburgh. This attitude of those powers excused our plenipotentiaries, though bound by our treaty with France not to conclude peace apart from her, for making the preliminary arrangements with England privately. At last, on November 30, 1782, Franklin, Jay, and John Adams set their signatures to preliminary articles, which were incorporated in a treaty of peace between Great Britain and the United States, France, and Spain, signed at Paris on September 3, 1783. David Hartley signed for England. Our Congress ratified on February 14, 1784.
The treaty recognized the independence of the United States. It established as boundaries nearly the present Canadian line on the north, the Mississippi on the west, and Florida, which now returned to Spain and extended to the Mississippi, on the south. Despite the wishes of Spain, the free navigation of the Mississippi, from source to mouth, was guaranteed to the United States and Great Britain. Fishery rights received special attention. American fishermen were granted the privilege of fishing, as before the war, on the banks of Newfoundland, in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and in all other places in the sea where the inhabitants of both countries had been accustomed to fish. Liberty was also granted to take fish on such parts of the coast of Newfoundland as British fishermen should use, and on the coasts, bays, and creeks of all other British dominions in America. American fishermen could dry and cure fish on the unsettled parts of Nova Scotia, Labrador, and the Magdalen Islands. America agreed, for the protection of British creditors, that debts contracted before the war should be held valid, and should be payable in sterling money. It was also stipulated that Congress should earnestly recommend to the several States the restitution of all confiscated property belonging to loyalists.
"Done at Paris, this third Day of September, In the Year of our Lord one thousand and seven hundred & eighty three.— D. Hartley, John Adams, B. Franklin, John Jay" Facsimile of Signatures to Treaty of Peace
[1783]
Peace came like a heavenly benediction to the country and the army, exhausted by so long and so fierce a struggle. No general engagement took place after the siege of Yorktown; but the armies kept close watch upon each other, and minor skirmishes were frequent. Washington's 10,000 men were encamped near the Hudson, to see that Clinton's forces in New York did no harm. In the South, Greene's valiant band, aided by Wayne and his rangers, without regular food or pay, kept the British cooped up in Charleston and Augusta.
Congress in due time declared cessation of hostilities, and on April 19, 1783, just eight years from the battle of Lexington, Washington read the declaration at the headquarters of his army. The British had evacuated Charleston the previous December. In July, Savannah saw the last of the redcoats file out, and the British troops were collected at New York. On November 25th, Sir Guy Carleton, who had superseded Clinton, embarked with his entire army, besides a throng of refugees, in boats for Long Island and Staten Island, where they soon took ship for England. "The imperial standard of Great Britain fell at the fort over which it had floated for a hundred and twenty years, and in its place the Stars and Stripes of American Independence flashed in the sun. Fleet and army, royal flag and scarlet uniform, coronet and ribbon, every sign and symbol of foreign authority, which from Concord to Saratoga and from Saratoga to Yorktown had sought to subdue the colonies, vanished from these shores. Colonial and provincial America had ended, national America had begun."
The American troops took possession of New York amid the huzzas of the people and the roar of cannon. On November 25th, Washington with his suite, surrounded by grateful and admiring throngs, made a formal entry into the city whence he had been compelled to flee seven years before.
The time had now come when the national hero might lay down the great burden which he had borne with herculean strength and courage through so many years of distress and gloom. On December 4th he joined his principal officers at the popular Fraunces's Tavern, near the Battery, to bid them farewell. Tears filled every eye. Even Washington could not master his feelings, as one after another the heroes who had been with him upon the tented field and in so many moments of dreadful strife drew near to press his hand. They followed him through ranks of parading infantry to the Whitehall ferry, where he boarded his barge, and waving his hat in a last, voiceless farewell, crossed to the Jersey shore.
Arrived at Annapolis after a journey which had been one long ovation, the saviour of his country appeared before Congress, December 23d, to resign the commission which he had so grandly fulfilled. His address was in noble key, but abbreviated by choking emotion. The President of Congress having replied in fitting words, Washington withdrew, and continued his journey to the long-missed peace and seclusion of his Mount Vernon home.
CHAPTER VIII.
AMERICAN MANHOOD IN THE REVOLUTION
[1775-1781]
It would be foolish to say that the Revolutionary soldiers never quailed. Militia too often gave way before the steady bayonet charge of British regulars, at times fleeing panic-stricken. Troops whose term of service was out would go home at critical moments. Hardships and lack of pay in a few instances led to mutiny and desertion. But the marvel is that they fought so bravely, endured so much, and complained so little. One reason was the patriotism of the people at large behind them. Soldiers who turned their backs on Boston, leaving Washington in the lurch, were refused food along the road home. Women placed rifles in the hands of husbands, sons, or lovers, and said "Go!"
The rank and file in this war, coming from farm, work-bench, logging-camp, or fisher's boat, had a superb physical basis for camp and field life. Used to the rifle from boyhood, they kept their powder dry and made every one of their scanty bullets tell. The Revolutionary soldier's splendid courage has glorified a score of battle-fields; while Valley Forge, with its days of hunger and nights of cold, its sick-beds on the damp ground, and its bloody footprints in the snow, tell of his patient endurance.
At Bunker Hill an undisciplined body of farmers, ill-armed, weary, hungry and thirsty, calmly awaited the charge of old British campaigners, and by a fire of dreadful precision drove them back. "They may talk of their Mindens and their Fontenoys," said the British general, Howe, "but there was no such fire there." At Charleston, while the wooden fort shook with the British broadsides, Moultrie and his South Carolina boys, half naked in the stifling heat, through twelve long hours smoked their pipes and carefully pointed their guns. At Long Island, to gain time for the retreat of the rest, five Maryland companies flew again and again in the face of the pursuing host. At Monmouth, eight thousand British were in hot pursuit of the retreating Americans. Square in their front Washington planted two Pennsylvania and Maryland regiments, saying, "Gentlemen, I depend upon you to hold the ground until I can form the main army." And hold it they did.
Heroism grander than that of the battlefield, which can calmly meet an ignominious death, was not lacking. Captain Nathan Hale, a quiet, studious spirit, just graduated from Yale College, volunteered to enter the British lines on Long Island as a spy. He was caught, and soon swung from an apple tree in Colonel Rutgers's orchard, a corpse. Bible and religious ministrations denied him, his letters to mother and sister destroyed, women standing by and sobbing, he met his fate without a tremor. "I only regret," comes his voice from yon rude scaffold, "that I have but one life to give for my country." It is a shame that America so long had no monument to this heroic man. One almost rejoices that the British captain, Cunningham, author of the cruelty to Hale, himself met death on the gallows, in London, 1791. How different from Hale's the treatment bestowed upon Andre, the British spy who fell into our hands. He was fed from Washington's table, and supported to his execution by every manifestation of sympathy for his suffering.
John Paul Jones.
The stanch and useful loyalty of the New England clergy in the Revolution has been much dwelt upon—none too much, however. With them should be mentioned the Rev. James Caldwell, Presbyterian pastor at Elizabeth, N. J., who, when English soldiers raided the town, and its defenders were short of wadding, tore up his hymn-book for their use, urging: "Give them Watts, boys, give them Watts."
No fiercer naval battle was ever fought than when Jones, in the old and rotten Bon Homme Richard, grappled with the new British frigate Serapis. Yard-arm to yardarm, port-hole to port-hole, the fight raged for hours. Three times both vessels were on fire. The Serapis's guns tore a complete breach in the Richard from main-mast to stern. The Richard was sinking, but the intrepid Jones fought on, and the Serapis struck.
Fight between the Bon Homme Richard and the Serapis.
As the roll of Revolutionary officers is called, what matchless figures file past the mind's eye! We see stalwart Ethan Allen entering Ticonderoga too early in the morning to find its commander in a presentable condition, and demanding possession "in the name of Almighty God and the Continental Congress "—destined, himself, in a few months, to be sailing down the St. Lawrence in irons, bound for long captivity in England. We behold gallant Prescott leisurely promenading the Bunker Hill parapet to inspirit his men, shot and shell hurtling thick around. There is Israel Putnam—"Old Put" the boys dubbed him. He was no general, but we forgive his costly blunders at Brooklyn Heights and Peekskill as we think of him leaving plough in furrow at the drum-beat to arms, and speeding to the deadly front at Boston, or with iron firmness stemming the retreat from Bunker Hill. Young Richard Montgomery might have been next to Washington in the war but for Sir Guy Carleton's deadly grape-shot from the Quebec walls the closing moments of 1775. Buried at Quebec, his remains were transferred by the State of New York, July 8, 1818, to their present resting-place in front of St. Paul's, New York City, the then aged widow tearfully watching the funeral barge as it floated past Montgomery Place on the Hudson.
General Anthony Wayne.
During a four years' apprenticeship under Washington, General Greene had caught more of his master's spirit and method than did any other American leader, and one year's separate command at the South gave him a martial fame second only to Washington's own. In him the great chief's word was fulfilled, "I send you a general." A naked, starving army, an empty military chest, the surrounding country impoverished and full of loyalists—these were his difficulties. Three States practically cleared of the royal army in ten months—this was his achievement. He retreated only to advance, was beaten only to fight again. One hardly knows which to admire most, his tireless energy and vigilance, his prudence in retreat, his boldness and vigor in attack, his cheerful courage in defeat, or his mingled kindness and firmness toward a suffering and mutinous army.
John Stark, eccentric but true, famous for cool courage—how stubbornly, with his New Hampshire boys, he held the rail fence at Bunker Hill, and covered the retreat when ammunition was gone! But Stark's most brilliant deed was at Bennington. "There they are, boys—the redcoats, and by night they're ours, or Molly Stark's a widow." Those "boys," without bayonets, their artillery shooting stones for balls, were little more than a mob. But with confidence in him, on they rush, up, over, sweeping Baume's Hessians from the field like a tornado. The figure of General Schuyler comes before us—quieter but not less noble, an invalid, set to hard tasks with little glory. His magnanimous soul forgets self in country as he cheerfully gives all possible help to Gates, his supplanter, and puts the torch to his own grain-fields at Saratoga lest they feed the foe.
The Encounter between Tarleton and Colonel Washington.
And matchless Dan Morgan of Virginia, with his band of riflemen, tall, sinewy fellows, in hunting-shirts, leggins, and moccasins, each with hatchet, hunter's knife, and rifle, dead sure to hit a man's head every time at two hundred and fifty yards. It was one of these men who shot the gallant Briton, Fraser, at Bemis's Heights. Morgan became the ablest leader of light troops then living. How gallantly he headed the forlorn hope under the icy walls of Quebec, where he was taken prisoner, and at Saratoga with his shrill whistle and stentorian voice called his dauntless braves where the fight was thickest! But Cowpens was Morgan's crowning feat. Inspiring militia and veterans alike with a courage they had never felt before, he routs Tarleton's trained band of horse, and then, skilful in retreat as he had been bold in fight, laughs at baffled Cornwallis's rage.
Gladly would one form fuller acquaintance with other Revolutionary leaders: Stirling, Sullivan, Sumter, Mad Anthony Wayne, of Monmouth and Stony Point fame, Glover with his brave following of Marblehead fishermen, who, able to row as well as shoot, manned the oars that critical night when General Washington crossed to Trenton. But space is too brief. Colonel Washington, the dashing cavalryman, was the Custer of the Revolution. All the patriot ladies idolized him. In a hot sword-fight with the Colonel, Tarleton had had three fingers nearly severed. Subsequently in conversation with a South Carolina lady Tarleton said: "Why do you ladies so lionize Colonel Washington? He is an ignorant fellow. He can hardly write his name." "But you are a witness that he can make his mark," was the reply.
DeKalb Wounded at Camden.
DeKalb was an American, too—by adoption. It is related that he expostulated with Gates for fighting so unprepared at Camden, and that Gates intimated cowardice. "Tomorrow will tell, sir, who is the coward," the old fellow rejoined. And tomorrow did tell. As the battle reddened, exit Gates from Camden and from fame. We have recounted elsewhere how like a bull De Kalb held the field. A monster British grenadier rushed on him, bayonet fixed. DeKalb parried, at the same time burying his sword in the grenadier's breast so deep that he was unable to extract it. Then seizing the dead man's weapon he fought on, thrusting right and left, till at last, overpowered by numbers, he slipped and fell, mortally hurt.
Among the civilian heroes of the Revolution, Robert Morris, the financier, deserves exceeding praise. Now turning over the lead ballast of his ships for bullets, now raising $50,000 on his private credit and sending it to Washington in the nick of time, now leading the country back to specie payment in season to save the national credit, the Philadelphia banker aided the cause as much as the best general in the field.
Faithful and successful envoys as Jay and John Adams were, the Revolution brought to light one, and only one, true master in the difficult art of diplomacy—Franklin. Wise with a lifetime's shrewd observation, venerable with years, preceded by his fame as scientist and Revolutionary statesman, grand in his plain dignity, the Philadelphia printer stood unabashed before the throne of France, and carried king and diplomats with an art that surprised Europe's best-trained courtiers. Never missing an opportunity, he yet knew, by delicate intuition, when to speak and when to hold his tongue. Through concession, intrigue, and delay, his resolute will kept steady to its purpose. To please by yielding is easy. To carry one's point and be pleasing still, requires genius. This Franklin did—how successfully, our treaty of alliance with France and our treaty of peace with England splendidly attested.
Towering above Revolutionary soldier, general, and statesman stands a figure summing up in himself all these characters and much more. That figure is George Washington, the most perfect human personality the world has known. Washington's military ability has been much underrated. He was hardly more First in Peace than First in War. That he had physical courage and could give orders calmly while bullets whizzed all about, one need not repeat. He was strategist and tactician too. Trenton and Yorktown do not cover his whole military record. With troops inferior in every single respect except natural valor, he out-generalled Howe in 1776, and he almost never erred when acting upon his own good judgment instead of yielding to Congress or to his subordinates. His movements on the Delaware even such a captain as Frederick the Great declared "the most brilliant achievements in the annals of military action." Washington advised against the attempt to hold Fort Washington, which failed; against the Canada campaign, which failed; against Gates for commander in the South, who failed; and in favor of Greene for that post, who succeeded. His army was indeed driven back in several battles, but never broken up. At Monmouth his plan was perfect, and it seems that he must have captured Clinton but for the treason of Charles Lee, set, by Congress's wish, to command the van. Indeed, of Washington's military career, "take it all in all, its long duration, its slender means, its vast theatre, its glorious aims and results, there is no parallel in history." [Footnote: Winthrop, Washington Monument Oration. February 23, 1885.]
Yet we are right in never thinking of the Great Man first as a soldier, he was so much besides. Washington's consummate intellectual trait was sound judgment, only matched by the magnificent balance which subsisted between his mental and his moral powers. "George had always been a good son," his mother said. Nature had endowed him with intense passions and ambitions, but neither could blind him or swerve him one hair from the line of rectitude as he saw it. And he made painful and unremitting effort to see it and see it correctly. He was approachable, but repelled familiarity, and whoever attempted this was met with a perfectly withering look. He rarely laughed, and he was without humor, though he wrote and conversed well. He had the integrity of Aristides. His account with Congress while general shows scrupulousness to the uttermost farthing. To subordinate, to foe, even to malicious plotters against him, he was almost guiltily magnanimous. He loved popularity, yet, if conscious that he was right, would face public murmuring with heart of flint. Became the most famous man alive, idolized at home, named by every tongue in Europe, praised by kings and great ministers, who compared him with Caesar, Charlemagne, and Alfred the Great, his head swam not, but with steadfast heart and mind he moved on in the simple pursuit of his country's weal. "In Washington's career," said Fisher Ames, "mankind perceived some change in their ideas of greatness; the splendor of power, and even the name of conqueror had grown dim in their eyes." Lord Erskine wrote him: "You are the only being for whom I have an awful reverence." "Until time shall be no more," said Lord Brougham, "will a test of the progress which our race has made in Wisdom and Virtue be derived from the veneration paid to the immortal name of Washington." And Mr. Gladstone: "If among all the pedestals supplied by history for public characters of extraordinary nobility and purity I saw one higher than all the rest, and if I were required at a moment's notice to name the fittest occupant for it, my choice would light upon WASHINGTON." [Footnote: See Winthrop's Oration for these and other encomia.]
CHAPTER IX.
THE OLD CONFEDERATION
[1781]
The Revolutionary Congress was less a government than an exigency committee. It had no authority save in tacit general consent. Need of an express and permanent league was felt at an early date. Articles of Confederation, framed by Dickinson, of Pennsylvania, were adopted by Congress in November, 1777. They were then submitted to the State Legislatures for ratification. By the spring of 1779 all the States but Maryland had given their approval. Upon the accession of the latter, on March 1, 1781, the articles went into effect at once.
The Confederation bound the States together into a "firm league of friendship" for common defence and welfare, and this "union" was to be "perpetual." Each State retained its "sovereignty" and "independence," as well as every power not "expressly delegated" to the central Government. Inhabitants of each State were entitled to all the privileges of citizens in the several States. Criminals fleeing from one State to another were to be returned.
Congress was composed of delegates chosen annually, each State being represented by not less than two or more than seven. Each State had but one vote, whatever the number of its delegates.
Taxation and the regulation of commerce were reserved to the State Governments. On the other hand, Congress alone could declare peace or war, make treaties, coin money, establish a post-office, deal with Indians outside of the States, direct the army, and appoint generals and naval officers. Many other things affecting all the States alike, Congress alone could do. It was to erect courts for trial of felonies and piracies on the high seas, and appoint judges for the settlement of disputes between the States. It was to make estimates for national expenses, and request of each State its quota of revenue.
To amend the Articles, the votes of the entire thirteen States were demanded. Important lesser measures—such as those regarding war or peace, treaties, coinage, loans, appropriations—required the consent of nine States. Upon other questions a majority was sufficient. A committee, composed of one delegate from each State, was to sit during the recess of Congress, having the general superintendence of national affairs.
The faults of the Confederation were numerous and great. Three outshadowed the rest: Congress could not enforce its will, could not collect a revenue, could not regulate commerce.
Congress could not touch individuals; it must act through the State Governments, and these it had no power to coerce. Five States, for instance, passed laws which violated the treaty provision about payment of British creditors; yet Congress could do nothing but remonstrate. Hence its power to make treaties was almost a nullity. European nations did not wish to treat with a Government that could not enforce its promises.
Congress could make requisition upon the States for revenue, but had no authority to collect a single penny. The States complied or not as they chose. In October, 1781, Congress asked for $8,000,000; in January, 1783, it had received less than half a million. Lack of revenue made the Government continually helpless and often contemptible.
Yet in spite of their looseness and other faults, the adoption of the Articles of Confederation was a forward step in American public law. Their greatest value was this: they helped to keep before the States the thought of union, while at the same time, by their very inefficiency, they proved the need of a stronger government to make union something more than a thought. The years immediately after the war were an extremely critical period. The colonies had indeed passed through the Red Sea, but the wilderness still lay before them. The great danger which had driven them into union being past, State pride and jealousy broke out afresh. "My State," not "my country," was the foremost thought in most minds. There was serious danger that each State would go its own way, and firm union come, if at all, only after years of weakness and disaster, if not of war. The unfriendly nations of Europe were eagerly anticipating such result. At this juncture the Articles of Confederation, framed during the war when union was felt to be imperative, did invaluable service. They solemnly committed the States to perpetual union. Their provisions for extradition of criminals and for inter-State citizenship helped to break down the barriers between State and State. Congress, by discharging its various duties on behalf of all the States, kept steadily before the public mind the idea of a national government, armed with at least a semblance of authority.
The Franklin Penny. "United States" "We Are One" "Fugio" "1787" "Mind Your Business"
[1783]
The war had cost about $150,000,000. In 1783 the debt was $42,000,000—$8,000,000 owed in France and Holland, and the rest at home. The States contributed in so niggardly a way that even the interest could not be paid. Five millions were owing to the army. Deep and ominous discontent spread among officers and men. An obscure colonel, supposed to be the agent of more prominent men, wrote to Washington, advocating a monarchy as the only salvation for the country, and inviting him to become king. In the spring of 1783 an anonymous address, of menacing tone, was circulated in the army, calling upon it for measures to force its rights from an ungrateful country.
[1785]
That the army disbanded quietly at last, with only three months' pay, in certificates depreciated nine-tenths, was due almost wholly to the boundless influence of Washington. How powerless the Government would have been to resist an uprising of the army, was shown by a humiliating incident. In June, 1783, a handful of Pennsylvania troops, clamoring for their pay, besieged the doors of Congress, and that august body had to take refuge in precipitate flight.
The country suffered greatly for lack of uniform commercial laws. So long as each State laid its own imposts, and goods free of duty in one State might be practically excluded from another, Congress could negotiate no valuable treaties of commerce abroad.
The chief immediate distress was from this wretchedness of our commercial relations, whether foreign or between the States at home. If our fathers would be independent, king and parliament were determined to make them pay dearly for the privilege. Accordingly Great Britain laid tariffs upon all our exports thither. What was much harder to bear, an order of the king in council, July 2, 1783, utterly forbade American ships to engage in that British West-Indian trade which had always been a chief source of our wealth. The sole remedy for these abuses in dealing with England at that time was retaliation, but Congress had no authority to take retaliatory steps, while the separate States could not or would not act sufficiently in harmony to do so. If one imposed customs duties, another would open wide its ports, filling the markets of the first with British goods by overland trade, so that the customs law of the first availed nothing. If Pennsylvania and New York laid tariffs on foreign commodities, New Jersey and Connecticut people, in buying imported articles from Philadelphia or New York, were paying taxes to those greater States. North Carolina was in the same manner a forced tributary to South Carolina and Virginia, as were portions of Connecticut and Massachusetts to Rhode Island.
Dollar of 1794. The First United States Coin. "Liberty" "1794" "United States of America"
We also needed a complete system of courts, departments for foreign and Indian affairs, and an efficient executive. The single vote for each State was unfair, allowing one-third of the people to defeat the will of the rest. The article requiring the consent of nine States made it almost impossible to get important measures through Congress. Delegates should not have been paid by their respective States. In consequence of this provision, coupled with other things, Congress decreased in numbers and importance. In November, 1783, less than twenty delegates were present, representing but seven States, and Congress had to appeal to the recreant States to send back their representatives before the treaty of peace could be ratified.
[1787]
But the one grand defect of the Confederation, underlying all others, was lack of power. The Government was an engine without steam. The States, just escaped from the tyranny of a king, would brook no new authority strong enough to endanger their liberties. The result was a thin ghost of a government set in charge over a lot of lusty flesh-and-blood States.
The Confederation, however, did one piece of solid work worthy of everlasting praise. The Northwest Territory, embracing what is now Ohio, Indiana. Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, had been ceded to the Union by the States which originally claimed it. July 13, 1787, Congress adopted for the government of the territory the famous Ordinance of 1787. It provided for a governor, council, and judges, to be appointed by Congress, and a house of representatives elected by the people. Its shining excellence was a series of compacts between the States and the territory, which guaranteed religious liberty, made grants of land and other liberal provisions for schools and colleges, and forever prohibited slavery in the territory or the States which should be made out of it. Thus were laid broad and deep the foundation for the full and free development of humanity in a region larger than the whole German Empire.
The passing of the Ordinance was probably due in large measure to the influence of the Ohio Company, a colonist society organized in Boston the year before. It was composed of the flower of the Revolutionary army, and had wealth, energy, and intelligence. When its agent appeared before Congress to arrange for the purchase of five million acres of land in the Ohio Valley, a bill for the government of the territory, containing neither the antislavery clause nor the immortal principles of the compacts, was on the eve of passage. The Company, composed mostly of Massachusetts men, strongly desired their future home to be upon free soil. Their influence prevailed with Congress, eager for revenue from the sale of lands, and even the Southern members voted unanimously for the remodelled ordinance. The establishment of a strong and enlightened government in the territory led to its rapid settlement. Marietta, 0., was founded in April, 1788, and other colonies followed in rapid succession.
CHAPTER X.
RISE OF THE NEW CONSTITUTION
[1787]
The anarchy succeeding the Revolution was as sad as the Revolution itself had been glorious. The Articles of Confederation furnished practically no government with which foreign nations could deal; England still clung to the western posts, contrary to the treaty of peace, with no power anywhere on this side to do more than protest; the debt of the confederacy steadily piled up its unpaid interest; the land was flooded with irredeemable paper money, state and national; the confederacy's laws and constitution were ignored or trampled upon everywhere; and the arrogance and self-seeking of the several States surpassed everything but their own contemptible weakness.
In 1786 Shays' rebellion broke out in Massachusetts. Solid money was very scarce, and paper all but worthless, yet many debts contracted on a paper basis were pressed for payment in hard money. The farmers swore that the incidence of taxes upon them was excessive, and upon the merchants too light. But the all-powerful grievance was the sudden change from the distressing monetary injustice during the Revolution, with the consequent increase of debts, to a rigid enforcement of debtors' claims afterward. At this period men were imprisoned for debt, and all prisons were frightful holes, which one would as lief die as enter. Meetings were held to air the popular griefs, and grew violent.
In August the court-house at Northampton was seized by a body of armed men and the court prevented from sitting. Similar uprisings occurred at Worcester, Springfield, and Concord. The leader in these movements was Daniel Shays, a former captain in the continental army. Governor Bowdoin finally called for volunteers to put down the rebellion, and placed General Lincoln in command. After several minor engagements, in which the insurgents were worsted, the decisive action took place at Petersham, where, in February, 1787, the rebels were surprised by Lincoln. A large number were captured, many more fled to their homes, and the rest withdrew into the neighboring States. Vermont and Rhode Island alone offered them a peaceful retreat, the other States giving up the fugitives to Massachusetts.
A Scene at Springfield, during Shays' Rebellion, when the mob attempted to prevent the holding of the Courts of Justice.
The Shays commotion, for a long time shaking one of the stanchest States in the Confederation, well showed the need of a far stronger central government than the old had been or could be made. Other influences concurred to the same conviction. Washington's influence, which took effect mainly through his inspired letter to the States on leaving the army, was one of these. National feeling was also furthered by the spread of two religious sects, the Baptists and the Methodists, up and down the continent, whose missionary preachers, ignoring State lines and prejudices, helped to destroy the latter in their hearers.
[1785]
During the Revolution, American Methodism had been an appanage of England. Wesley had discountenanced our effort at independence, and when war broke out, all the Methodist preachers left the country, save Asbury, who secreted himself somewhere in Delaware, waiting for better days. But in 1784 this zealous body of Christians was organized as an American affair, its clergy and laity after this displaying loyalty of the most approved kind.
John Wesley.
Schemes had been mooted looking to a changed political order. A proposition for a convention of the States to reform the Confederation passed the New York Legislature in July, 1782, under the influence of Alexander Hamilton; another passed that of Massachusetts, July, 178$, urged by Governor Bowdoin; but because of too great love for state independence and too little appreciation as yet of the serious nature of the crisis, both motions failed of effect.
The idea of reform which found most favor, the only one which at first had any chance of getting itself realized, was that of giving Congress simply the additional power of regulating commerce. Even so moderate a proposal as this had many enemies, especially in the South. Greatly to her credit therefore as a Southern State, the purpose of amending the old Articles in the direction indicated was first taken up in earnest by Virginia. Her Legislature, soon after opening session in October, 1785, listened to memorials from Norfolk, Suffolk, Portsmouth, and Alexandria, upon the gloomy prospects of American trade, which led to a general debate upon the subject. In this, Mr. Madison, by a speech far exceeding in ability any other that was made, began that extended and memorable career of efforts for enlarged function in our central government which has earned him the title of the Father of the Constitution.
The result of this discussion was a bill directing the Virginia delegation in Congress to propose amendment to the constitution giving to Congress the needed additional power. The enemies of the bill, however, succeeded in so modifying it by limiting the proposed grant of power to a period of thirteen years, that Madison and its other abettors turned against it and voted to lay it on the table.
There was in existence at this very time a joint commission representing Virginia and Maryland, which had been raised for the purpose of determining what jurisdiction each of the two States had over the Potomac and in Chesapeake Bay. Madison was one of the Virginia commissioners. A meeting had been held on March 17, 1785, at which the commissioners agreed in their report to transcend their instructions and to recommend to the two States uniform monetary and commercial regulations entire, including common export and import duties. They thus reported, adding the still further recommendation that commissioners to work out the details of such a plan be appointed each year till it should be completed. The Maryland Legislature adopted the report, adding the proposition that Delaware and Pennsylvania also should be invited to enter the system and to send commissioners.
When the commissioners' report, with Maryland's action thereon, came before the Virginia Legislature, Madison moved, as a substitute for the mutilated bill which had been tabled previously, that the invitation to take part in the commission go to all the States. The motion passed by a large majority.
[1786]
Thus originated the Annapolis Convention of 1786. Nine States appointed delegates; all but Connecticut, Maryland, and the two Carolinas; but of the nine only Virginia, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York actually sent them. As the powers granted the commissioners presupposed a deputation from each of the States, those present, after mature deliberation, deemed it inadvisable to proceed, drawing up instead an urgent address to the States to take "speedy measures" for another, fuller, convention to meet on the second Monday of May, 1787, for the same purposes as had occasioned this one. Such was the mode in which the memorable Federal Convention came about. Its seat was Philadelphia.
[1787]
The second Monday of May, 1787, which should have witnessed the opening, was the 14th, but on that day too few deputies had assembled. So late as the 25th only nine States were represented. They, however, effected an organization on the 25th and chose officers. On the 28th eleven States were present, so that on the next day business began in earnest. Governor Randolph read and expounded the Virginia plan for a new government, and Charles Pinckney the South Carolina plan. Both of these were referred to a committee of the whole to sit next day.
This Virginia plan was substantially the work of Madison, and was the earliest sketch of the present Constitution of the United States. With the Pinckney plan, it was worked over, debated, and amended in the committee of the whole, until June 13th, on which day the committee rose and reported to the Convention nineteen resolutions based almost wholly upon the Virginia plan. These were the text for all the subsequent doings of the Convention.
The so-called New Jersey plan was brought forward on June 15th, the gist of it being a recurrence to the foolish idea of merely repairing the Confederation that then was. Its strength, which was slight, consisted in its accord with the letter of the credentials which the delegates had brought. It was, however, emphatically rejected, the Convention stretching instructions, ignoring the old government, and proceeding to build from the foundations. On July 24th and 26th the resolutions, now increased to twenty-three, were put in the hands of a committee of detail to be reported back in the form of a constitution. They reappeared in this shape on August 6th, and this new document was henceforth the basis of discussion. On September 8th a new committee was appointed to revise style and arrangement, and brought in its work September 13th, after which additions and changes were few. The Constitution received signature September 17th.
The Federal Convention of 1787 was the most remarkable gathering in all our national history thus far. Sixty-five delegates were elected, but as ten never attended, fifty-five properly made up the body. Even these were at no time all present together. From July 5th to August 13th New York was not represented. Rhode Island was not represented at all. Washington was President; Franklin, aged eighty-one, the oldest member; Gillman, of New Hampshire, aged twenty-five, the youngest. Each State sent its best available talent, so that the foremost figures then in American political life were present, the chief exceptions being John Adams, Jefferson—both abroad at the time—Samuel Adams, not favorable to the Convention, John Jay, and Patrick Henry. Eight of the members had signed the great Declaration, six the Articles of Confederation, seven the Annapolis appeal of 1786. Washington and a good half dozen others had been conspicuous military leaders in the Revolution. Five had been or still were governors of their respective States. Nearly all had held important offices of one sort or another. Forty of the fifty-five had been in Congress, a large proportion of them coming to the Convention directly from the congressional session just ended in New York.
It is interesting to note how high many from this Constituent Assembly rose after the adoption of the paper which they had indited. Washington and Madison became Presidents, Gerry Vice-President, Langdon senator and President of the Senate, with duty officially to notify him who was already First in War that the nation had made him also First in Peace. Langdon was candidate for Vice-President in 1809. Randolph was the earliest United States Attorney-General, Hamilton earliest Secretary of the Treasury, M'Henry third Secretary of War, succeeding General Knox. Dayton was a representative from New Jersey in the IId, IIId, IVth, and Vth Congresses, being Speaker during the last, then senator in the VIth, VIIth, and VIIIth. Ellsworth and Johnson were Connecticut's first pair of senators, Johnson passing in 1791 to the presidency of Columbia College, Ellsworth to the national chief-justiceship to succeed Jay. Rutledge was one of the first associate justices of the Supreme Court. Subsequently, in July, 1795, Washington nominated him for chief justice, and he actually presided over the Supreme Court at its term in that year; but, for his ill-mannered denunciation of Jay's treaty, the Senate declined to confirm him. Wilson and Patterson also each held the position of associate justice on the supreme bench of the nation.
Rufus King, after the adoption of the Constitution, removed to New York. He was a senator from that State between 1789 and 1795, and again between 1813 and 1826; and Minister to England from 1796 to 1803, and again after 1826 till his failing health compelled his resignation. He was the federalist candidate for Vice-President in 1804 and 1808, and for President in 1816. Sherman of Connecticut, Gillman of New Hampshire, and Baldwin of Georgia, went into the House of Representatives and were promoted thence to the Senate. Robert Morris of Pennsylvania, Gouverneur Morris, now again of New York, Caleb Strong of Massachusetts, William Patterson of New Jersey, Richard Bassett of Delaware, Alexander Martin and Blount of North Carolina, Charles Pinckney and Butler of South Carolina, and Colonel Few of Georgia, all became senators. Madison, Gerry, Fitzsimmons of Pennsylvania, Carroll of Maryland, and Spaight and Williamson of North Carolina, all wrought well in the House, but did not reach the Senate. Charles Cotesworth Pinckney was nominated for the Presidency in 1800, on the ticket with John Adams, again in 1804, and still again in 1808.
Jared Ingersoll was the federalist candidate for Vice-President in 1812, on the ticket with De Witt Clinton, against Madison and Gerry. Yates rose to be Chief Justice of the State of New York, Lansing to be its Chancellor. Gerry and Strong of Massachusetts, Patterson of New Jersey, Bassett of Delaware, Spaight and Davie of North Carolina, and Charles Pinckney of South Carolina, became Governors of their States, as did Alexander Martin, of North Carolina, a second time.
Having received final revision and signature, the Constitution was transmitted, with a commendatory letter from Washington, to the old Congress. Suggestions were added relating to the mode of launching it. Congress was requested to lay the new Great Charter before the States, and, so soon as it should have been ratified by nine of them, to fix the date for the election by these of presidential electors, the day for the latter to cast their votes, and the time and place for commencing proceedings under the revised constitution. Congress complied. The debates of the Convention, only more hot, attended ratification, which was carried in several States only by narrow majorities.
[1788-1790]
Delaware was the first to ratify, December 7, 1787. Pennsylvania and New Jersey soon followed, the one on the 12th of the same month, the other on the 18th. Delaware and New Jersey voted unanimously; Pennsylvania ratified by a vote of forty-six to twenty-three. During the first month of the new year, 1788, Georgia and Connecticut ratified, on the 2d and 9th respectively. New Hampshire next took up the question, but adjourned her convention to await the action of Massachusetts. In this great State the people were divided almost equally. Of the western counties the entire population that had sympathized or sided with Shays was bitter against the Constitution. The larger centres and in general the eastern part of the State favored it. The vote was had on February 6th, and showed a majority of only 19 out of 355 in favor of the Constitution.
Celebrating the Adoption of the Constitution in New York.
The good work still remained but half done. It was a crisis. Accordingly, early in this year, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay published their weighty articles, since collected in the immortal volume known as "The Federalist." These discussions seemed to have much effect. Maryland ratified on April 28th, and South Carolina on May 23d. New Hampshire fell into line, the necessary ninth State to ratify, June 21st. Thus the Constitution became binding, yet it was still painfully uncertain what the action of Virginia and New York would be. In both States the Constitution was opposed by many of the most influential men, and after a long and heated canvass adoption occurred in Virginia by a majority of only ten in a vote of 168; in New York by the narrow majority of two. Even now North Carolina and Rhode Island remained aloof. The former, not liking the prospect of isolation, came into the Union November 21, 1789, after the new government had been some time at work. Rhode Island, owing to her peculiar history in the matter of religious liberty, which she feared a closer union would jeopardize, as well as to the strength of the paper-money fanaticism within her borders, was more obdurate. The chief difficulty here was to get the legislature to call a convention. The New York Packet of February 20, 1790, in a letter from Rhode Island, tells how this was accomplished. Among the anti-adoptionists in the senate was a rural clergyman who, prompted by his conscience, or, as one account runs, by exhortation and the offer of a conveyance by an influential member of the adoption party, was, when Sunday came, absent upon his sacred work. The occasion was seized for a ballot. The senate was a tie, but the Governor threw the casting vote for a convention. This was called as soon as possible, and on May 29, 1790, Rhode Island, too, at the eleventh hour, made the National Constitution her own. Not only had a MORE PERFECT UNION been formed at last, but it included all the Old Thirteen States.
PART SECOND
THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE CONSTITUTION
PERIOD I.
THE UNITED STATES AND THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
1789-1814
CHAPTER I.
THE NEW GOVERNMENT
Notified on July 2, 1788, that nine States had voted approval of the Constitution, Congress, on September 13th, set the first Wednesday in January, 1789, for the choice of electors, the first in February for their ballot, and the first in March for putting the new government in motion. The first Wednesday in March, 1789, happening to fall on the 4th, this date has since remained as the initial one for presidencies and congresses. The First Congress had no quorum in either branch on March 4th, and did not complete its organization till April 6th. Washington was inaugurated on April 30th, in New York, where the First Congress, proceeding to execute the Constitution, held its entire first session. Its second session was in Philadelphia, the seat of Congress thence till the second session of the VIth Congress, 1800, since which time Congress has always met in Washington.
The inauguration of our first President was an imposing event. As the hero moved from his house on Franklin Square, through Pearl Street to Broad, and through Broad to Federal Hall, corner of Wall Street, people thronged every sidewalk, door-way, window, and roof along the entire line of march. About him on the platform after his arrival stood John Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Baron Steuben, Generals St. Clair and Knox, Roger Sherman, and Chancellor Livingston. Washington advanced to the rail, placed his hand upon his breast, and, bowing low, said audibly, as the Chancellor in his robes solemnly recited the words, "I swear, so help me God," reverently kissing the Bible as if to add solemnity to his oath. "It is done," cried the Chancellor; "long live George Washington, President of the United States!" The great crowd repeated the cry. It was echoed outside in the city, off into the country, far north, far south, till the entire land took up that watchword, which his own generation has passed on to ours and to all that shall come, Long live George Washington!
Let us study for a moment the habitat of the people over which the new Chief Magistrate was called to bear sway. By the census of 1790, the population of the thirteen States and of the territory belonging to the Union numbered 3,929,214. It resided almost wholly on the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. Not more than five per cent of it was west of the mountains. The line of inner settlement, now farther, now nearer, ran at an average distance from the coast of two hundred and fifty-five miles. The coast land of Massachusetts, southern New England, and New York was the most densely covered. The Hudson Valley was well peopled as far as Albany. Farms and hamlets were to be met all the way from New York across New Jersey to the Delaware, and far up the Delaware Valley westward from that river. Maine, still belonging to Massachusetts, had few settlements except upon her coast and a little way inland along her great rivers. Vermont, not yet a State and claimed by both New Hampshire and New York, was well filled up, as was all New Hampshire but the extreme north.
The westward movement of population took mainly four routes, the Mohawk and Ontario, the Upper Potomac, the Southwestern Virginia, and the Western Georgia. The Mohawk Valley was settled, and pioneers had taken up much land on Lake Ontario and near the rivers and lakes tributary to it. Elmira and Binghamton had been begun. Pennsylvania settlers had pressed westward more or less thickly to the lower elevations of the Alleghanies, while beyond, in the Pittsburgh regions, they were even more numerous. What is now West Virginia had squatters here and there. Virginian pioneers had also betaken themselves southwestward to the head of the Tennessee. North and South Carolina were inhabited as far west as the mountains, though the population was not dense. In Northern Kentucky, along the Ohio, lay considerable settlements, and in Tennessee, where Nashville now is, there was another centre of civilization. In the Northwest Territory, Detroit, Vincennes, Kaskaskia, Prairie du Chien, Mackinac, and Green River were outposts, at each of which a few white men might have been found.
The following table shows pretty nearly the population of the several States about the end of the Revolution: New Hampshire 102,000 Massachusetts 330,000 Rhode Island [1783] 51,869 [2,342 of them negroes, 464 mulattoes, 525 Indians.] Connecticut [1782] 208,870 New York [1786] 215,283 New Jersey[1785] 138,934 [10,500 of them negroes.] Pennsylvania 330,000 Delaware 37,000 Maryland 250,000 [80,000 of them negroes.] Virginia 532,000 [280,000 of them negroes.] North Carolina 224,000 [60,000 of them negroes.] South Carolina 188,000 [80,000 of them negroes.] Georgia [rough estimate] 80,000 [20,000 of them negroes.]
Another table exhibits approximately the number of houses in the principal cities of the country in 1785-86. It was customary then in estimating population to allow seven persons to each house. This multiplier is probably too large rather than too small.
Population, multiplying Houses. number of houses by seven. Portsmouth, N. H 450 3,150 Newburyport 510 3,570 Salem, Mass 730 5,210 Boston 2,200 15,400 Providence 560 3,920 Newport 790 5,530 Hartford 300 2,100 New Haven 400 2,800 New York 3,340 23,380 Albany and suburbs 550 3,850 Trenton 180 1,260 Philadelphia and suburbs 4,500 31,500 Wilmington 400 2,800 Baltimore 1,950 13,650 Annapolis 260 1,820 Frederick, Md. 400 2,800 Alexandria 300 2,100 Richmond 310 2,170 Petersburg 280 1,960 Williamsburg 230 1,610 Charleston 1,540 10,780 Savannah 200 1,400
The first New York City Directory appeared in 1786. It had eight hundred and forty-six names, not going above Roosevelt and Cherry Streets on the East side, or Dey Street on the West. There were then in the city three Dutch Reformed churches, four Presbyterian, three Episcopal, two German Lutheran, and one congregation each belonging to the Catholics, Friends, Baptists, Moravians, and Jews. In 1789 the Methodists had two churches, and the Friends two new Meetings. The houses in the city were generally of brick, with tile roofs, mostly English in style, but a few Dutch. The old Fort, where the provincial governors had resided, still stood in the Battery. The City Hall was a brick structure, three stories high, with wings, fronting on Broad Street. Want of good water greatly inconvenienced the citizens, as there was no aqueduct yet, and wells were few. Most houses supplied themselves by casks from a pump on what is now Pearl Street, this being replenished from a pond a mile north of the then city limits. New York commanded the trade of nearly all Connecticut, half New Jersey, and all Western Massachusetts, besides that of New York State itself. In short it did the importing for one-sixth of the population of the Union. Pennsylvania and Maryland made the best flour. In the manufacture of iron, paper, and cabinet ware, Pennsylvania led all the States.
Over this rapidly growing portion of the human race in its widely separated homes there was at last a central government worthy the name. The old Articles of Confederation had been no fundamental law, not a foundation but a homely botch-work of superstructure, resembling more a treaty between several States than a ground-law for one. In the new Constitution a genuine foundation was laid, the Government now holding direct and immediate relations with each subject of every State, and citizens of States being at the same time citizens of the United States. Hitherto the central power could act on individuals only through States. Now, by its own marshals, aided if need were by its army, it could itself arrest and by its own courts try and condemn any transgressor of its laws.
But if the State relinquished the technical sovereignty which it had before, it did not sink to the level of an administrative division, but increased rather in all the elements of real dignity and stability. Over certain subjects the new constitution gave the States supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable power. The range of this supreme state prerogative is, in fact, wider on the whole than that of national. For national action there must be demonstrable constitutional warrant, for that of States this is not necessary. In more technical phrase: to the United States what is not granted is denied, to the State what is not denied is granted. It is a perpetual reminder of original state sovereignty, that no State can without its consent be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. Each State also must have at least one representative. States cannot be sued by private persons or corporations. Even upon subjects constitutionally reserved for national law, if Congress has not legislated state statute is valid.
Precisely as its advocates had prophesied, this revised order worked well, bringing a blessed new feeling of security. On commerce and business it conferred immense benefits, which rapidly became disseminated through all classes of the population. The sense and appearance of unity and consequent strength which the land had enjoyed in the early days of the Revolution came back in greater completeness, and was most gratifying to all. There was still a rankling hatred toward England, and men hostile to central government on other grounds were reconciled to it as the sole condition of successful commercial or naval competition with that country.
The consequence was a wide-spread change of public feeling in reference to the Constitution very soon after its adoption. Bitterest hostility turned to praise that was often fulsome, reducing to insignificance an opposition that had probably comprised a popular majority during the very months of ratification. Many shifted their ground merely to be on the popular side. With multitudes Washington's influence had more weight than any argument.
The Constitution's unfortunate elasticity of interpretation also for the time worked well. People who had fought it saw how their cherished views could after all be based upon it. All parties soon began, therefore, to swear by the Constitution as their political Bible. The fathers of the immortal paper were exalted into demigods. Fidelity to the Constitution came to be pre-eminently the watchword of those till now against its adoption. They in fact shouted this cry louder than the Federalists, who had never regarded it a perfect instrument of government. It came to pass ere long that nothing would blast a public measure so instantly or so completely as the cry of its unconstitutionality.
Map Showing the Progressive Acquisitions of Territory by the United States
Few can form any idea of the herculean work performed by the First Congress in setting up and starting our present governmental machinery. The debt which we owe the public men of that time is measureless. With such care and wisdom did they proceed, that little done by them has required alteration, the departments having run on decade after decade till now essentially in their original grooves. The Senate formed itself into its three classes, so that one-third of its members, and never more than this, should retire at a time. Four executive departments were created, those of State, the Treasury, War, and the Attorney-Generalship. The first occupants were, respectively, Jefferson, Hamilton, Knox, and Randolph.
Of the present departments of government the post-office alone has come down from colonial times, Benjamin Franklin having been general superintendent thereof under the British Government. He was re-appointed by the second Continental Congress, in July, 1775. The First Congress under the Constitution erected a general post-office, but its head attained the dignity of a regular cabinet officer not till about 1830, and then only by custom. To begin with, in fact, there was strictly no cabinet in the modern sense. Washington's habit was to consult his ministers separately.
Under the Articles of Confederation there had been a treasury board of several commissioners, and a superintendent of finance. The new arrangement, making one man responsible, was a great improvement. A law was passed forbidding the Secretary of the Treasury to be concerned in trade or commerce, that is, to be a merchant. The late A. T. Stewart, appointed by President Grant to the office, was rejected as ineligible under this law. Yet no department of our Government has had a finer record than the Treasury.
Not only had the First Congress to vote revenue, but to make provision for the collection of this. Revenue districts had to be mapped out, the proper officers appointed, and light-houses, buoys, and public piers arranged for along the whole coast. Salaries were to be fixed, and a multitude of questions relating to the interpretation and application of the Constitution to be solved by patient deliberation. The United States Mint was erected, and our so felicitous monetary system, based upon the decimal principle along with the binary, established in place of the desperate monetary chaos prevailing before. Hitherto there were four sorts of colonial money of account all differing from sterling, while Mexican dollars and numberless other forms of foreign money were in actual circulation.
The noblest part of all this work was the organization of the federal judiciary, through an act drawn up with extraordinary ability by Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut. A Chief Justice—the first one was John Jay—and five associates were to constitute the Supreme Court. District courts were ordained, one per State and one each for Kentucky and Maine, not yet States; also three circuit courts, the eastern, the middle, and the southern; and the jurisdiction of each grade was accurately fixed. As yet there were no special circuit judges, nor, excepting the temporary ones of 1801, were there till some eighty years later. Clerks, marshals, and district-attorneys were part of this first arrangement. Originally the Attorney-General was little but an honorary officer. He kept his practice, had no public income but his fees, and resided where he pleased.
As his title implies, the Secretary of War was to have charge of all the nation's means of offence and defence, there being until April 30, 1796, no separate secretary for the navy. We had indeed in 1789 little use for such a functionary, not a war-vessel then remaining in Government's possession. In 1784 our formidable navy consisted of a single ship, the Alliance, but the following year Congress ordered her sold.
The senators most active in the creations just reviewed were Langdon, King, and Robert Morris, besides Ellsworth. In the House, Madison outdid all others in toil as in ability, though worthily seconded by distinguished men like Fisher Ames, Gerry, Clymer, Fitzsimmons, Boudinot, and Smith. The three Connecticut representatives, Sherman, Trumbull, and Wadsworth, made up perhaps the ablest state delegation in the body.
CHAPTER II.
FEDERALISM AND ANTI-FEDERALISM
[1790]
Early in the life of our Constitution two parties rose, which, under various names, have continued ever since. During the strife for and against adoption, those favoring this had been styled Federalists, and their opponents, Anti-Federalists. After adoption—no one any longer really antagonizing the Constitution—the two words little by little shifted their meaning, a man being dubbed Federalist or Anti-Federalist according to his preference for strong national government or for strong state governments. The Federalist Party gave birth to the Whig Party, and this to the modern Republican Party. The Anti-Federalists came to be called "Republicans," then "Democratic-Republicans," then simply "Democrats."
The central plank of the federalist platform was vigorous single nationality. In aid of this the Federalists wished a considerable army and navy, so that the United States might be capable of ample self-defence against all foes abroad or at home. Partly as a means to this, partly to build up national feeling, unity, self-respect, and due respect for the nation abroad, they sought to erect our national credit, which had fallen so low, and to plant it on a solid and permanent basis. As still further advancing these ends they proposed so to enforce regard for the national authority and laws and obedience to them, that within its sphere the nation should be absolutely and beyond question paramount to the State.
In many who cherished them these noble purposes were accompanied by a certain aristocratic feeling and manner, a carelessness of popular opinion, an inclination to model governmental polity and administration after the English, and an impatience with what was good in our native American ideas and ways, which, however natural, were unfortunate and unreasonable. Puffed up with pride at its victory in carrying the Constitution against the opposition of the ignorant masses, this party developed a haughtiness and a lack of republican spirit amounting in some cases to deficient patriotism.
The early Federalists were of two widely different stripes. There were among them Washington, Adams, Hamilton, and Jay; and there were the interested and practical advocates of the same, made up of business men and the wealthy and leisurely classes, who, without intending to be selfish, were governed in political sympathy and action mainly by their own interests.
The greatest early Anti-Federalists were Jefferson, Madison, and Randolph, all of whom had been ardent for the Constitution. The party as a whole, indeed, not only acquiesced in the re-creation of the general Government, but was devotedly friendly to the new order. But while Republicans admitted that a measure of governmental centralization was indispensable, they prized the individual State as still the main pillar of our political fabric, and were hence jealous of all increased function at the centre. It became more and more their theory that the States, rather than the individuals of the national body politic, had been the parties to the Constitution, so making this to be a compact like the old Articles, and the government under it a confederacy as before 1789.
Another issue divided the parties, that between the strict and the more free interpretation of the Constitution—between the close constructionists and the liberal constructionists. The question dividing them was this: In matters relating to the powers of the general Government, ought any unclear utterance of the Constitution to be so explained as to enlarge those powers, or so as to confine them to the narrowest possible sphere? Each of the two tendencies in construction has in turn brought violence to our fundamental law, but the sentiment of nationality and the logic of events have favored liberality rather than narrowness in interpreting the parchment. When in charge of the government, even strict constructionists have not been able to carry out their theory. Thus Jefferson, to purchase Louisiana, was obliged, from his point of view, to transcend constitutional warrant; and Madison, who at first opposed such an institution as unconstitutional, ended by approving the law which chartered the Second United States Bank.
The Federalists used to argue that Article I, Section VIII., the part of the Constitution upon which debate chiefly raged, could not have been intended as an exhaustive statement of congressional powers. The Government would be unable to exist, they urged, to say nothing of defending itself and accomplishing its work, unless permitted to do more than the eighteen things there enumerated. They further insisted that plain utterances of the Constitution presuppose the exercise by Congress of powers not specifically enumerated, explicitly authorizing that body to make all laws necessary for executing the enumerated powers "and all other powers vested in the Government of the United States or in any department or officer thereof."
In reply the Anti-Federalists made much of the titles "United States," "Federal," and the like, in universal use. They appealed to concessions as to the nature of our system made by statesmen of known national sympathies. Such concessions were plentiful then and much later. Even Webster in his immortal reply to Hayne calls ours a government of "strictly limited," even of "enumerated, specified, and particularized" powers. Two historical facts told powerfully for the anti-federalist theory. One was that the government previous to 1789 was unquestionably a league of States; the other was that many voted for the present Constitution supposing it to be a mere revision of the old. Had the reverse been commonly believed, adoption would have been more than doubtful.
CHAPTER III.
DOMESTIC QUESTIONS OF WASHINGTON'S ADMINISTRATIONS
[1790-1791]
I. Tariff.—Upon declaring their independence the United States threw open their ports, inviting trade from all nations. During the Revolution foreign commerce had become an important interest, and at its close the inclination of all, the more so from memory of England's accursed navigation acts, would have been to leave it untrammelled. Several motives, however, induced resort to a restrictive policy which, beginning with 1789, and for years expected to be temporary, has been pursued with little deviation ever since. Of course the Government needed revenue, and the readiest means of securing this was a tax on imports. Rates were made low, averaging until 1808 only 11-1/4 per cent. As a consequence the revenues were large.
The movers of this first tariff, especially Hamilton, also wished by means of it to make the central Government felt as a positive power throughout the land. It had this effect. All custom-houses passed to the United States, and United States officers appeared at every port, having an authority, in its kind, paramount to that of state functionaries.
A stronger consideration still was to retaliate against England. In spite of America's political independence the old country was determined to retain for her merchant marine its former monopoly here. Orders in council practically limited all the commerce of England and her remaining colonies with this country to English ships, although, from the relations of the two lands and the nature of their productions, our chief foreign trade must still be with England. There was no way to meet this selfish policy but to show that it was a game which we too could play.
Besides, however we behaved toward the mother-land, we needed to be prepared for war, because it was evident that George III. and his ministers had only too good a will to reduce us again to subjection if opportunity offered. Should we, by taxing imports, become independent in the production of war material, a fresh struggle for life would be much more hopeful than if we continued dependent upon foreign lands for military supplies.
II. Funding the Debt.—In the first years after they had set up their new constitution the people of this country staggered under a terrible financial load. Besides the current expenses of Government, there were: 1, the federal debt due abroad, over thirteen million dollars, including arrears; 2, the federal debt held at home, about forty-two and one-half million; 3, the state revolutionary debts, aggregating nearly twenty-five million. Each of these sums was largely made up of unpaid interest.
The foreign debt Congress unanimously determined to pay in full. In respect to the domestic federal debt two opinions prevailed. Hamilton was for liquidating this also to the last copper. But these securities had mostly changed hands since issue, so that dollar for dollar payment would not advantage original holders but only speculators. As soon as Hamilton's recommendation became public this class of paper rose from about fifteen cents per dollar to fifty cents, and enterprising New York firms hurried their couriers, relay horses, and swift packets to remote parts of the Union to buy it up. Madison, supported by a strong party, proposed, therefore, to pay only original debtors at par, allowing secondary holders barely the highest market value previous to the opening of the question in Congress. He was overruled, however, and this part of the debt, too, was ordered paid according to its literal terms.
Even the motion that the United States should assume and discharge the state debts finally prevailed, though against most violent and resolute opposition. This came especially from Virginia, who had gone far in the payment of her own war debt, and thought it unjust to have to help the delinquent States. Her objection was strengthened by the fact that most of the debt was owned in the North. The victory was secured by what is now termed a "deal," northern votes being promised in favor of a southern location for the national capital, in return for enough southern votes to pass the bill assuming state debts.
These gigantic measures had origin in the mind of Hamilton. To many they appeared and appear today like a grand government job. But they worked well, laying the foundation of our national credit. Interest arrears and back installments of the foreign debt were to be paid at once with the proceeds of a fresh loan, supplemented by income from customs and tonnage. The remaining debt was to be refunded. Federal stocks shot up in value, moneyed interests became attached to the Government, and the nation began to be looked to as a more reliable bulwark of sound finance than any of the States.
Alexander Hamilton. From a painting by John Trumbull in the Trumbull Gallery at Yale College.
III. The Excise.—Unexpectedly productive as the tariff had proved, public income still fell short of what these vast operations required. Direct taxation or a higher tariff being out of the question, Hamilton proposed, and Congress voted, an excise on spirits, from nine to twenty-five cents a gallon if from grain, from eleven to thirty if from imported material, as molasses. Excise was a hated form of tax, and this measure awakened great opposition in Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and New England, and most of all in Pennsylvania, in whose western counties distilling was the staple industry.
Here, far from the seats of power, even the state government had asserted itself little. The general Government was defied. A meeting in Washington County voted to regard as an enemy any person taking office under the excise law. September 6, 1791, a revenue officer was tarred and feathered. Other such cases followed. Secret societies were formed to oppose the law. Whippings and even murders resulted. At last there was a veritable reign of terror. The President proceeded slowly but with firmness, accounting this a good opportunity vividly to reveal to the people the might of the new Government. Militia and volunteers were called out, who arrived in the rebellious districts in November, 1794. Happily, their presence sufficed. The opposition faded away before them, not a shot being fired on either side.
Illicit Distillers warned of the Approach of Revenue Officers.
IV. The Bank.—The Secretary of the Treasury pleaded for a United States Bank as not only profitable to Government but indispensable to the proper administration of the national finances. Congress acquiesced, yet with so violent hostility on the part of many that before approving the Charter Act Washington required the written opinions of his official advisers. Jefferson powerfully opposed such an institution as unconstitutional, his acute argument being the arsenal whence close constructionists have gotten their weapons ever since. Randolph sided with Jefferson, Knox with Hamilton. The President at last signed, agreeing with Hamilton in the view that Congress, being the agent of a sovereignty, is not, within any sphere of action constitutionally open to it, shut up to specific or enumerated modes of attaining its ends, but has choice among all those that nations customarily use. The Supreme Court has proceeded on this doctrine ever since. The bank proved vastly advantageous. Three-fourths of every private subscription to its stock had to be in government paper, which raised this to par, while it naturally became the interest of all stockholders to maintain and increase the stability and credit of the Government.
CHAPTER IV.
RELATIONS WITH ENGLAND
[1793]
In 1789 France adopted a constitution. Provoked at this, the friends of absolute monarchy withdrew from France, and incited the other powers of Europe to interpose in effort to restore to Louis XVI. his lost power. The result was that Louis lost his head as well as his power, and that France became a republic. War with all Europe followed, which elevated that matchless military genius, Napoleon Bonaparte, first to the head of France's armies, then to her throne, to be toppled thence in 1814, partly by his own indiscretions, partly by the forces combined against him.
From the beginning to the end of this revolutionary period abroad, European politics determined American politics, home as well as foreign, causing dangerous embarrassment and complications. War having in February, 1793, been declared by England and France against each other, what attitude the United States should assume toward each became a pressing question. Washington's proclamation of neutrality, April 22, 1793, in effect, though not so meant, annulled our treaty of 1778 with France, which bound us to certain armed services to that monarchy in case of a rupture between her and England. Washington's paper alleged that "the duty and interests of the United States" required impartiality, and assumed "to declare the disposition of the United States to observe" this.
"The proclamation," wrote Jefferson, "was in truth a most unfortunate error. It wounds the popular feelings by a seeming indifference to the cause of liberty. And it seems to violate the form and spirit of the Constitution by making the executive magistrate the organ of the 'disposition' 'the duty' and 'the interest' of the nation in relation to war and peace—subjects appropriated to other departments of the Government."
"On one side," says Mr. Rives, in his "Life of Madison," "the people saw a power which had but lately carried war and desolation, fire and sword, through their own country, and, since the peace, had not ceased to act toward them in the old spirit of unkindness, jealousy, arrogance, and injustice; on the other an ally who had rendered them the most generous assistance in war, had evinced the most cordial dispositions for a liberal and mutually beneficial intercourse in peace, and was now set upon by an unholy league of the monarchical powers of Europe, to overwhelm and destroy her, for her desire to establish institutions congenial to those of America."
The more sagacious opponents of the administration believed true policy as well as true honesty to demand rigid and pronounced adherence to the letter of the French treaty. They were convinced from the outset that France would vanquish her enemies, and that close alliance with her was the sure and the only sure way to coerce either Great Britain to justice or Spain to a reasonable attitude touching the navigation of the Mississippi; while by offending France, they argued, we should be forced to wrestle single-handed with England first, then with victorious France, meantime securing no concession whatever from Spain.
This was a shrewd forecast of the actual event. The Federalists, destitute of idealism, proved to have been overawed by the prestige of England and to have underestimated the might which freedom would impart to the French people. After Napoleon's great campaign of 1796-97, Pitt seeks peace, which the French Directory feels able to decline. In 1802 the Peace of Amiens is actually concluded, upon terms dictated by France. Had we been still in France's friendship, the two republics might have compelled England's abandonment of that course which evoked the war of 1812. As it was, ignored by England, to whom, as detailed below, we cringed in consenting to Jay's treaty, we were left to encounter the French navy alone, escaping open and serious war with France only by a readiness to negotiate which all but compromised our dignity. The Mississippi we had at last to open with money.
The federalist leaning toward Great Britain probably did not, to so great an extent as was then alleged and widely believed, spring from monarchical feeling. It was due rather to old memories, as pleasant as they were tenacious, that would not be dissociated from England; to the individualistic tendencies of republicanism, alarming to many; and to conservative habits of political thinking, the dread of innovation and of theory. The returned Tories had indeed all become Federalists, which fact, with many others, lent to this attitude the appearance of deficient patriotism, of sycophancy toward our old foe and persecutor.
Great Britain had refused to surrender the western posts according to the peace treaty of 1783, unjustly pleading in excuse the treatment of loyalists by our States. Not only the presence but the active influence of the garrisons at these posts encouraged Indian hostilities. England had also seized French goods in American (neutral) vessels, though in passage to the United States, and treated as belligerent all American ships plying between France and her West Indian colonies, on the ground that this commerce had been opened to them only by the pressure of war. The English naval officers were instructed to regard bread-stuffs as contraband if bound for France, even though owned by neutrals and in neutral ships; such cargoes, however, to be paid for by England, or released on bonds being given to land them elsewhere than in France. In this practice England followed France's example, except that she actually paid for the cargoes, while France only promised.
John Jay. From a painting by S. F. B. Morse in the Yale College Collection.
[1795]
Worst of all, Britain claimed and acted upon the right to press into her naval service British-born seamen found anywhere outside the territory of a foreign State, halting our ships on the high seas for this purpose, often leaving them half-manned, and sometimes recklessly and cruelly impressing native-born Americans—an outrageous policy which ended in the war of 1812. The ignorance and injustice of the English admiralty courts aggravated most of these abuses.
Genet's proceedings, spoken of in the next chapter, which partly public sentiment, partly lack of army and navy, made it impossible for our Government to prevent, enraged Great Britain to the verge of war. After the British orders in council of November 6, 1793, intended to destroy all neutral commerce with the French colonies, and Congress's counter-stroke of an embargo the following March, war was positively imminent. The President resolved to send Jay to England as envoy extraordinary, to make one more effort for an understanding.
The treaty negotiated by this gentleman, and ratified June 24, 1795 (excepting Article XII., on the French West India trade), was doubtless the most favorable that could have been secured under the circumstances; yet it satisfied no one and was humiliating in the extreme. The western posts were indeed to be vacated by June 1, 1796, though without indemnity for the past, but a British right of search and impressment was implicitly recognized, the French West Indian trade not rendered secure, and arbitrary liberty accorded to Great Britain in defining contraband. Opposition to ratification was bitter and nearly universal. The friends of France were jubilant. Jay was burned in effigy, Washington himself attacked. The utmost that Hamilton in his powerful "Letters of Camillus" could show was that the treaty seemed preferable to war. Plainly we had then little to hope and much to fear from war with Great Britain, yet even vast numbers of Federalists denounced the pact as a base surrender to the nation's ancient tyrant, and wished an appeal to arms.
Fisher Ames's eloquence decided the House for the treaty. An invalid, with but a span of life before him, he spoke as from the tomb. "There is, I believe," so ran his peroration, "no member who will not think his chance to be a witness of the consequences (should the treaty fail of ratification) greater than mine. If, however, the vote should pass to reject, and a spirit should rise, as it will, with the public disorders, to make confusion worse confounded, even I, slender and almost broken as my hold on life is, may outlive the Government and Constitution of my country!"
It was the most delicate crisis of Washington's presidency, and no other American then alive, being in his place, could have passed through it successfully. After the fury gradually subsided, men for a long time acquiesced rather than believed in the step which had been taken. In the end the treaty proved solidly advantageous, rather through circumstances, however, than by its intrinsic excellence.
CHAPTER V.
RELATIONS WITH THE FRENCH REPUBLIC
[1793]
At its beginning all Americans hailed the Revolution in France with joy, but its terrible excesses, when they appeared, produced here the same effect as in England, of alienating everyone conservatively inclined. This included the mass of the Federalist party. On the contrary, most of the Republicans, now more numerous, now less, actuated partly by true insight into the struggle, and partly by the magic of the words "revolution" and "republic," favored the revolutionists with a devotion which even the Reign of Terror in France scarcely shook. It was in consequence of this attitude on its part that the party came to be dubbed "democratic-republican" instead of "republican," the compound title itself giving way after about 1810 to simple "democratic."
John Adams From a copy by Jane Stuart, about 1874, of a painting by her father, Gilbert Stuart, about 1800—in possession of Henry Adams.
Hostility to England, the memory of France's aid to us in our hour of need, the doctrine of "the rights of man," then so much in vogue, the known sympathies of Jefferson and Madison, who were already popular, and, alas, a mean wish to hamper the administration, all helped to swell the ranks of those who swung their hats for France. A far deeper motive with the more thoughtful was the belief that neutrality violated our treaty of 1778 with France, a conclusion at present beyond question. Politically our policy may have been wise, morally it was wrong.
The administration, at least its honored head, was doubtless innocent of any intentional injustice; and it could certainly urge a great deal in justification of its course. The form and the aims of the French Government had changed since the treaty originated, involving a state of things which that instrument had not contemplated. France herself defied international law and compact, revolutionizing and incorporating Holland and Geneva, and assaulting our commerce. And war with England then threatened our ruin. Yet the pleading of these considerations in that so trying hour, even had they been wholly pertinent, could not but seem to Frenchmen treason to the cause of liberty. As to many Federalists, trucklers to England, such a charge would have been true.
France was not slow to reciprocate in the matter of grievances. In fact, so early as May, 1793, before the proclamation of neutrality could have been heard of in that country, orders had been issued there, wholly repugnant to the treaty (which had ordained that neutral ships could carry what goods they pleased—free ships, free goods), to capture and condemn English merchandise on American vessels. Provisions owned by Americans and en route to England were also to be forfeited as contraband. Even the most reasonable French officials seemed bent on treating our country as a dependency of France.
We see this in the actions of Genet, the first envoy to America from the French constitutional monarchy, accredited hither by a ministry of high-minded Republicans while Louis XVI. still sat upon his throne. Genet arrived in Charleston in 1793, before our neutrality had been proclaimed. Immediately, before presenting his credentials to our Government, he set about fitting out privateers, manning them with Americans, and sending them to prey upon British ships, some of which they captured in American waters. All this was in utter derogation of the treaty, which only guaranteed shelter to bona fide French vessels. Under a law of the French National Convention, Genet assumed to erect the French consulates in this country into so many admiralty courts for the trial of British prizes. We could not have allowed this without decidedly violating international law at least in spirit. He also devised and partly arranged expeditions of Americans, to start, one from Georgia to invade Florida, another from Kentucky to capture New Orleans, both as means of weakening Spain, which up to this time and for several years later was France's foe.
[1795]
But Genet's worst gall came out in his conduct toward Washington. Him he insulted, challenging his motives and his authority for his acts and threatening to appeal from him to the people. He tried to bully and browbeat the whole cabinet as if they had been so many boys. So ludicrous did he make himself by such useless bluster, that his friends, at first numerous and many of them influential, gave him the cold shoulder, and the ardor for France greatly cooled. At length Washington effected his removal, the more easily, it would seem, as he was not radical enough for the Jacobins, who had now succeeded to the helm in France. The officious Frenchman did not return to his own country, but settled down in New York, marrying a daughter of Governor Clinton. He was succeeded by Adet.
George Clinton. From a painting by Ezra Ames.
Upon learning that the United States had ratified Jay's treaty, France went insane with rage. A declaration of war by us could not have angered her more. Adet was called home and the alliance with America declared at an end. Barras dismissed Mr. Monroe, our minister, in a contemptuous speech, and Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, sent as Monroe's successor, was not only not received but ordered from the land. New and worse decrees went forth against American commerce. Our ships were confiscated for carrying English goods though not contraband. Arbitrary and unheard-of tests of neutrality were trumped up, wholly contrary to the treaty, which indeed was now denounced. American sailors found serving, though compelled, on British armed vessels, were to be condemned as pirates.
[1797]
These brutal measures, coupled with Napoleon's increasing power, begot in America the belief, even among Republicans, that France's struggle was no longer for liberty but for conquest. The insolence of the French Government waxed insufferable. President Adams, to a special session of the Vth Congress, on May 19, 1797, announced the insult to the nation in the person of Pinckney, and urged preparation for war. A goodly loan, a direct tax, and a provisional army, Washington again leader, were readily voted. Our Navy Department was created at this time. The navy was increased, and several captures were made of French vessels guilty of outrage. Adams, however, to make a last overture for peace, despatched John Marshall and Elbridge Gerry to the aid of Pinckney, the three to knock once more at France's doors for a becoming admission. In vain. The only effect was a new chapter of French mendacity and insolence, furthering America's wish and preparations for war. Napoleon's recent Italian victories, terrifying Europe, had puffed up France with pride. Talleyrand assumed to arraign us as criminals, and what was worse, pressed us, through his agents, to buy his country's forgiveness with gold. "You must pay money," our envoys were told, and "a good deal of it, too."
John Marshall.
All this was duly made known at Philadelphia, and the President assured Congress that no terms were obtainable from France "compatible with the safety, honor, and general interest of the nation." The opposition thought this an exaggeration, and called for the despatches, expecting refusal or abridgment. The President sent every word.
Elbridge Gerry
Confusion seized the Republicans. Federalists were again in the ascendant, the VIth Congress being much more strongly federalist than the Vth. For once proud, reserved John Adams was popular, and anti-French feeling irresistible. "Millions for defence but not a cent for tribute," echoed through the land. Hosts of Republicans went over to the administration side. Patriotism became a passion. Each night at the theatre rose a universal call for the "President's March" [Footnote: The music was that of our "Hail Columbia."] and "Yankee Doodle," the audience rising, cheering, swinging hats and canes, and roaring "encore." The black cockade, American, on all hands supplanted the tricolor cockade worn by the "Gallomaniacs;" and bands of "Associated Youth," organizing in every town and city, deluged the President with patriotic addresses.
Seeing that we could not be bullied and that the friends of France here were Americans first; ashamed, on their publication, of the indignities which he had offered our envoys, and after all not wishing war with what he saw to be potentially another naval power like England, the sly Talleyrand neatly receded from his arrogant demands, and expressed a desire to negotiate.
CHAPTER VI.
THE DECLINE OF THE FEDERALIST PARTY
[1797]
The heat of the nation's wrath evoked by this conflict with France betrayed the Federalists in Congress into some pieces of tyrannical legislation. These were especially directed against refugees from France, lest they should attempt to reenact here the bloody drama just played out there. Combinations were alleged, without proof, to exist between American and French democrats, dangerous to the stability of this Government.
A new naturalization act was passed, requiring of an immigrant, as prerequisite to citizenship, fourteen years of residence instead of the five heretofore sufficient. Next came three alien acts, empowering the President, at his discretion, without trial or even a statement of his reasons, to banish foreigners from the land; any who should return unbidden being liable to imprisonment for three years, and cut off from the possibility of citizenship forever. A "sedition act" followed, to fine in the sum of $5,000 each and to imprison for five years any persons stirring up sedition, combining to oppose governmental measures, resisting United States law, or putting forth "any false, scandalous, or malicious writings" against Congress, the President, or the Government. |
|
