t / 
 
 r^ 
 
 oL^ 
 
 ^, t\ 13 
 
^13 
 
AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. 
 
 RHODE ISLAND AND THE IMPOST OF 1781. 
 
 BY 
 
 FEANK GEEENE BATES, 
 
 OF CORNELL UNIVEESITY. 
 
 (From the Annual Keport of the American Historical Association for 1894, pages 351-359.) 
 
 WASHINGTON : 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 
 1896. 
 
FEB 3 1303 
 D. ofO, 
 
 K^\^'^ 
 
XIX.-RHODE ISLAND AND THE IMPOST OF 1781. 
 
 By Frank Greene Bates, of Cornell Uuiversity. 
 
 At the close of the year 1780 afl'airs in America were in so 
 critical a condition that it seemed as if the extremity was at 
 hand. There was still but the germ of a constitutional union. 
 Congress was helpless. Demands on the States for money had 
 almost ceased to be of avail. Credit was at low ebb. The 
 Army was suffering from the lack of pay, provisions, and cloth- 
 ing. Mutiny pervaded the air. Heroic measures were neces- 
 sary. '' If we mean to continue our struggle," said Washing- 
 ton, " we must do it upon an entire new plan. Ample powers 
 must be lodged in Congress, as the head of the Federal Union, 
 adequate to all the purposes of war."i Again, " There can be 
 no radical cure till Congress is vested by the States with full 
 and ample powers to enact laws for general purposes." ^ Only 
 then would ruinous delays cease. As a step toward greater 
 efficiency Congress, on February 3, 1781, recommended that 
 they be vested with power to lay a duty of 5 per cent on all 
 goods, with a few exceptions, imported from foreign lands, and 
 a like duty on all prizes condemned in the admiralty courts."^ 
 New Hampshire soon granted the request, and before the sum- 
 mer of 1782 she was followed by all the States except Ehode 
 Island and Georgia. 
 
 Here is the point at which Ehode Island departed from that 
 hearty acquiescence which she had given to every act tending 
 to united resistance to oppression or to the prosecution of the 
 war. From the date of her first official protest against the 
 navigation laws in June, 1764, in the stamp-act congress, in 
 nonimportation agreements, in committees of correspondence, 
 
 1 Ford's "Washington, IX, 13. 
 
 nh., IX, 125. 
 
 3 Journal of Congress, 111,572. 
 
 351 
 
352 AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. 
 
 aud iu tbe adoption of the Articles of Confederation, that State 
 was found following closely the example of Massachusetts and 
 Virginia. In the official demand for a Continental Congress, 
 and in renouncing allegiance to Britain, she was the very first 
 of the thirteen colonies to act. Now, in 1781, she hesitated. 
 For the cause must be sought some new element entering into 
 the case. Heretofore Congress had had the direction of the 
 war, of foreign relations, and of the common interests of 
 the States. Now the General Government proposed to enter 
 the State with authority and there collect for its own use a 
 tax. The Articles of Confederation expressly declared the 
 States sovereign and independent. With that understanding 
 Ehode Island had ratified them. In the proposed measure 
 there was an intrusion on the Rhode Island idea of State sov- 
 ereignty; an idea expressed in the instructions to her dele- 
 gates, given in May, 1776, "to secure to this colony, in the 
 strongest and most perfect manner, its present established 
 form and all the powers of government^ so far as relate to 
 its internal police and conduct of our own affairs, civil and 
 religious."^ 
 
 This is the mainspring of the State's action in 1781 and 
 in the succeeding years to 1790. The full import of the idea 
 is exhibited in the discussion which followed through weary 
 months. For eight months Rhode Island remained silent on 
 the vital question. But if the men who remained at home saw 
 the world about them only through the exaggerated perspec- 
 tive of jirovincialism, the Delegates in Congress saw aright. 
 Varnum and Mowry wrote home from Congress in August, 
 1781 : " We are at a loss to conjecture the rumors which have 
 induced the State of Rhode Island to delay complying with 
 the requisition of Congress."^ In October Governor Greene 
 announced that the State was unable to determine the advisa- 
 bility of the measure, aud would await the action of the other 
 States.^ 
 
 Thus the matter rested until General Varnum returned 
 home near the close of the year to exert his influence in behalf 
 of the impost. In a series of articles published in the Provi- 
 dence Gazette he demonstrated the desirability of a stable 
 revenue, and developed his theory of a strong nationality.^ 
 
 • Rhode Island Colonial Records, VII, 526. 
 " Letters 1781-82, No. 3. 
 8 Rhode Island Colonial Records, IX, 485. 
 ■• Providence Gazette, March 9-16, 1782. 
 
RHODE ISLAND AND THE IMPOST OF 1781 BATES. 353 
 
 "Were we to contemplate the United States separately," he 
 writes, "as composing thirteen distinct sovereignties, uncon- 
 nected with and independent of each other, the reqnisitiou in 
 question would appear totally absurd and ridiculous. This, 
 however, is not the case."^ The utterance of such rank heresy 
 called forth in opposition a champion in the person of David 
 Howell. In a series of letters Howell advanced the arguments 
 of his party, which may fairly be taken as the sentiment of the 
 masses in the State.^ He compared the impost to the stamp act, 
 and gainsaid that Congress ever claimed power over the purse of 
 the people. He relied on the Articles of Confederation for proof 
 of the State's sovereignty, and absolutely denied that there was 
 any inherent sovereignty in Congress. The plan proposed 
 would work harm to the commercial States. " Indeed," said he, 
 "it is against the welfare of any commercial State to clog and 
 embarrass trade with any restrictions or duties whatever." ^ 
 But if duties were necessary let Ehode Island lay her own. On 
 the assumption that import duties are borne by the importer, 
 it was argued that when taxes were levied under the Articles 
 of Confederation, Rhode Island paid one-fiftieth of the whole 
 amount, but under the proposed system, granting that she pos- 
 sessed one twenty-fifth of the total shipping, she would pay 
 one twenty-fifth of the tax. Should customs officers be intro- 
 duced from without there would be no means of controlling 
 them. The funds collected would be turned into the general 
 Treasury, where the taxpayer could not observe their disburse- 
 ment. If there was any benefit to be derived from the power 
 to lay duties, the State should retain it, for the inland States 
 in their turn would not surrender their peculiar privileges. 
 The grant was considered further to be too indefinite. The 
 time was not specified and the grant was irrevocable. In short, 
 Ehode Island admitted her duty to pay her quota of taxes, but 
 only according to the Articles of Confederation. She consid- 
 ered it the most precious jewel of sovereignty that no State be 
 called on to open its purse but by authority of the State and 
 by her own officers. 
 
 Here the controversy rested. The Fabian policy of the oppo- 
 sition had kept the measure out of the assembly. The first 
 result was the retirement of Varnum and Mowry and the elec- 
 
 ' Providence Gazette, March 9-16, 1782. 
 2 lb., March 23-April 13, 1782. 
 3 lb., March 30, 1782. 
 
 H. Mis. 91 23 
 
354 AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. 
 
 tion of Delegates less favorable to the impost. These were 
 John Gollius, the future paper-money governor, General Cor- 
 nell, Jonathan Arnold, and, most notable of all, David Howell. 
 The latter was instructed to i^roceed to Congress, where he 
 soon had occasion once more to defend the position of his party, 
 this time before a Congressional committee. At the request 
 of a committee appointed to inquire why Georgia and Rhode 
 Island had not granted the impost, Howell appeared before 
 them to defeud his State. As in his newspaper writings he 
 had spoken to his neighbors, so now he s^Doke to the whole 
 country. His objections as now expressed were four: 
 
 (1) The proposed system tended to raise a revenue for the 
 use of the General Government and not of the State. This 
 would be paid by the merchants, and should they be unable 
 to obtain a correspondingly higher price for their goods, they 
 would be crushed out of existence. Such a burden would rest 
 more heavily on Rhode Island than any other State, from the 
 preponderance of the mercantile and manufacturing classes 
 and her inability to produce agricultural products sufdcient 
 for her own markets. 
 
 (2) Rhode Island had suffered heavily from the ravages of 
 war. Newport, which in 1774 sent out 150 sail, now sent out 
 but 3. To compensate for her losses the State should retain 
 the power of levying duties. More especially should this be 
 done in self-defense, so long as the large States persisted in 
 claiming western lands. 
 
 (3) It would be derogatory to the sovereignty of a State to 
 permit foreign officers within her boundaries collecting a reve- 
 nue for some outside authority. All revenue in the State, said 
 he, should be collected by her own officers and stand to her 
 own credit. 
 
 (4) The terms of the grant were too indefinite. Though the 
 intentions of the present Congress were honorable, their suc- 
 cessors, by keeping the national debt outstanding, might per- 
 petuate the impost. The States would be powerless to pre- 
 vent it. 
 
 In closing, Howell suggested two amendments. These were: 
 
 (1) That each State retain the appointment of the collectors. 
 
 (2) That the revenue collected in each State be credited to 
 the account of that State. By such changes the presence of 
 outside officers would be dispensed with, and Rhode Island 
 would be the gainer from the position which she expected 
 
RHODE ISLAND AND THE IMPOST OF 1781 BATES. 355 
 
 again to assume in tlie commercial world. ^ To neutralize such 
 arguments Morris sent an urgent appeal to Governor Greene, 
 but in vaiu.^ 
 
 Tiring of delay, Congress, on October 10, 1782, demanded 
 an immediate and definite answer to the proposition.^ With 
 the question now forced upon the Assembly Howell, writing to 
 Theodore Foster, said : 
 
 The crisis has arrived. * * * It is an important step. * * '^ i 
 Lope tliose wlio have undertaken to coutend for the liberties of their coun- 
 try and retain the zeal of 1775 will [disphiy] it on this important occa- 
 sion. * * * I hope every exertion will be made on the occasion by the 
 friends of liberty and free trade. * * * Should it be adopted, I shall no 
 longer consider myself the representative of a sovereign and free State, 
 but wish to be recalled. * * * This is but an entering wedge; others 
 will follow — a land tax, a poll tax, and an excise. ^ 
 
 In a last appeal to the assembly the Delegates rehearse to 
 that body the old arguments, and in tbeir extremity declare 
 that to grant this perpetual power was to abridge the rights 
 of future assemblies. ^ 
 
 The legislature met on the last Monday in October, and on 
 November 1 reached a vote on the impost. Of the whole num- 
 ber (68), 53 were present. The vote was unanimously against 
 the measure. Speaker Bradford communicated this resnlt to 
 Congress in a letter, giving three reasons for rejection. '^ These 
 were: (1) It would be unequal in operation, bearing most 
 heavily on the commercial States. (2) It proposed to intro- 
 duce into the State officers unknown and unaccountable to the 
 State government, and hence unconstitutional. (3) As the 
 grant was indefinite in time, it would tend to make Congress 
 independent, and would be dangerous to the liberties of the 
 States. At the same time he hastened to assure Congress 
 of the State's willingness to bear its share of the burdens of 
 the Government. Anticipating the storm that would arise in 
 Congress, instructions were sent to the Delegates — 
 
 To vindicate and supjiort with a becoming firmness on all occasions such 
 of the acts of the general assembly of this State as respect the United 
 States at large, and to use their utmost exertions to prevent any infringe- 
 ment being made on tlie sovereignty and independence thereof.' 
 
 1 Letters, 1781-82, July 30, 1782. 
 
 2 Letters, 1782-83, No. 1, Aiigust 2, 1782. 
 ^Journal of Cougi'ess, IV, 86. 
 
 •* Foster Corr., 1,20. 
 
 6 Letters, 1782-83, Nos. 22 and 23, October 13-15, 1782. 
 
 6Ib.No.38. 
 
 '' Acts and Resolves, MS., November 2, 1782. 
 
356 AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. 
 
 The response of Ebode Island was a new departure. No 
 other State, however much it had hampered its grant, had 
 refused outright. Even before the news of its fate arrived, the 
 conviction that the impost would be rejected was so strong 
 tliat a committee was appointed to visit Rhode Island and urge 
 the necessity of tlie measure.' Notwithstanding the arrival of 
 Bradford's letter, the committee set out on December 22, but 
 was recalled on the same day by intelligence that Virginia had 
 repealed her grant.^ 
 
 Early in the mouth it had been seen that the only hope of 
 winning over Rhode Island lay in crushing Howell's influence 
 there. A pretext for an attack on him was found in certain 
 writings on the foreign loans which appeared in the news- 
 Ijapers. These were pronounced derogatory to the charac- 
 ter of the United States and the honor of Congress, as well 
 as detrimental to the financial interests of the nation.^ The 
 Secretary of Foreign Affairs was directed to write to the gov- 
 ernor of Rhode Island to learn the author, but Howell having 
 acknowledged the authorship, it was moved that the Secretary 
 be discharged from these instructions, "■ Mr. Howell, a Delegate 
 from the State of Rhode Island, having acknowledged himself 
 the author of the extract of the letter quoted in the report of the 
 committee."^ Howell at once moved to j)ostpone this motion, 
 which placed his name on the journal in such a connection, to 
 consider a similar motion, accompanied by a formal acknowl- 
 edgment of the writings with his justification. He denied the 
 authority of Congress over his correspondence with his State 
 officials, and maintained the truth of his statements. The orig- 
 inal motion prevailed, followed by another, that whereas Con- 
 gress had admitted on their Journal an entry of a motion by 
 Mr. Howell highly derogatory to the honor and dignity of 
 Congress, a committee be appointed to determine what meas- 
 ures should be taken thereon.^ Accordingly the Secretary of 
 Foreign Affairs was directed to transmit Howell's motion, to- 
 gether with a statement of tlie foreign loans, to the executive 
 of Rhode Island, with a view to prove the falsity of the writ- 
 ings.'' But when, two weeks later, Arnold moved to forward 
 
 1 Jonrual of Congress, IV, 115; Madison Papers, 1, 225. 
 
 2 Madison Papers, I, 238,495; Journal of Congress, IV, 126. 
 
 3 Journal of Congress, IV, 114. , 
 "lb., IV, 120; Madison Papers, I, 223. 
 * Journal of Congress, IV, 122. 
 
 6 lb., IV, 122-123. 
 
RHODE ISLAND AND THE IMPOST OF 1781 BATES. 357 
 
 to the State executive certain letters substantiating Howell's 
 statements the motion was postponed. That the circumstance 
 might not be used by Howell in justification of his action, 
 the proceedings were placed on the secret journals.^ This 
 occasioned no little vexation in Congress. It was irregular, 
 and adopted only in the last extremity. That this attack 
 on Howell was made to break down his influence at home 
 is abundantly proved.^ Madison says the "unanimous suspi- 
 cions were fixed on Mr. Howell." It was thought that the 
 exposure of the author of the writings " would destroy in his 
 State that influence which he exerted in misleading its coun- 
 sels in regard to the impost."^ 
 
 The Rhode Island champion was the ultra state rights mem- 
 ber of the Continental Congress. Holding extreme opinions, 
 and forced often to maintain them against great odds, he some- 
 times overstepped the bounds of parliamentary courtesy and 
 practiced an obstruction policy no less vigorous than has been 
 pursued in our national Capitol in more recent years. Of his 
 sincerity and singleness of purpose there is ample proof in his 
 own writings and those of his colleague, Dr. Arnold. The 
 latter says : 
 
 It appears to have been his first and only wish to serve his country gen- 
 erally, and especially his constituents, with unshaken fidelity. » * * 
 He clearly understood the Articles of Confederation, and distinguished 
 between the rights relinquished by the separate States and those retained. •« 
 
 When the contest was at an end, the Assembly, at its session 
 in February, 1783, adopted resolutions approving the conduct 
 of their Delegates. The resolutions expressed their apprecia- 
 tion of " the meritorious services rendered to this State and to 
 the cause of freedom in general by the firmness and patriotic 
 conduct of the said Delegates, particularly in their strenuous 
 exertions to defeat the operation of measures which this State 
 considered as dangerous to the public liberty." ^ The attack 
 on the Ehode Island Delegate had failed. The impost was lost. 
 
 In reviewing Rhode Island's action on the impost the mo- 
 tives may be reduced to three: (1) A misunderstanding of 
 the effects of an impost duty. (2) Anxiety respecting the dis- 
 posal of the western lands. (3) An extraordinary jealousy of 
 
 • Secret Journal of Congress, I, 248-249. 
 2 Letters, 1782-83, No. 47, January 8, 1783. 
 ^ Madison Papers, I, 223. 
 ^ Letters, 1782-83, No. 34, December 6, 1782. 
 ^ Acts and Resolves, MS., February, 1783. 
 
358 AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION. 
 
 yielcliugj to outside authority any power over her internal 
 affairs. In relation to an impost Rhode Ishmd stood in a 
 pecuhar position. She was the only small State in which com- 
 merce and manufactures predominated. No State was so 
 dependent on her neighbors for agricultural produce. To 
 build up the former commerce of the State was the dream of 
 the new race of merchants. Free trade was to be the foster 
 mother of their enterprise. But should a duty be levied it 
 must be paid by the importer. He might or might not be able 
 to add this to the price of his goods. In case it was added, 
 the neighboring States would probably raise correspondingly 
 the price of produce. The proceeds from the duty, instead of 
 remaining in the State to balance this enhanced price, would be 
 withdrawn for the use of the National Government. Should 
 the neighboring States be provoked to lay an embargo against 
 her, the State would be in a sorry plight. 
 
 The attitude of Rhode Island toward the public domain was 
 similar to that of New Jersey, in that she did not contend for 
 nationaljurisdiction over the territory.' She simply demanded 
 that the proceeds from the sale of such lands should accrue to 
 the benefit of the general Treasury. From the first discussions 
 of the subject did her Delegates strive, as by their instructions 
 they were directed '■'■ to contend earnestly for this State's pro- 
 portion of vacant or back lands."^ Filled with this solution of 
 the nation's finances Rhode Island refused to yield her pecul- 
 iar advantages until she was assured of a fair share of the pro- 
 ceeds of this great domain. 
 
 The founders of the State represented the extreme of indi- 
 vidualism and the trait strongly marked their descendants. 
 Civil and religious liberty was granted by the charter of 1663 
 to a degree heretofore unknown and handed down the genera- 
 tions as a precious heirloom. The colony's first century had 
 been a struggle against oppression. From Plymouth, from 
 Massachusetts, from Connecticut, even from all combined, had 
 come persecutors of her citizens and claimants to her territory. 
 As a sovereign State she hastened to resist British oi:)pression. 
 But the century of controversy with her neighbors could not 
 fail to leave its scar, even after the wound had healed, and 
 now when the first step was taken toward transferring to the 
 
 ' Journal of Congress, II, 605. 
 
 *Acts and Resolves, MS., November 2, 1782. 
 
RHODE ISLAND AND THE IMPOST OF 1781 BATES. 359 
 
 General Government any power over the local affairs of the 
 State, she halted and refused to advance. In defeating the 
 imjiost of 1781 Rhode Island was victorious. But by her act 
 she began that course of opposition which, misunderstood by 
 our historians, is to this day flung at her as a reproach — a 
 course which ended only after a vital struggle in 1790. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Congress, Journals of, 1774-1788, 4 vols., Washington, 1823. 
 
 Congress, Secret Journals of, 1775-1788, 4 vols., Boston, 1821. 
 
 Foster, Theodore, Corresijondence of, MS. vols., in library of the Khode 
 
 Island Historical Society. 
 General Assembly of Rhode Island, Acts and Resolves of, 1728-1860, 52 MS. 
 
 folio vols., in Rhode Island State archives. 
 Letters, 1731-1800, 21 MS. vols, in Rhode Island State archives. 
 Madison, James, Papers of, edited by H. D. Gilpin, 3 vols., Mobile, 1842. 
 Providence Gazette and County Journal, 1762. 
 Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Records of, edited by J. R. Bart- 
 
 lett, 10 vols., Providence, 1856-1865. 
 Washington, George, Writings of, edited by W. C. Ford, 14 vols.. New 
 
 York and Loudon, 1889-1893. 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 011 698 880 P