Yale University Library

III I '.''

39002002546068

^^¦¦^v.:v:*¦;

a* .v-r:

SlTit^A V.I

U*^Hiu ij<^#auiQ!iHfti!Hr3

"IgLvetieJ'e B&iks
fortiie f landing <ifj^ Ceit^gf in tkiS: Cqlotif

o
A SURVEY

OF

American History

SOURCE EXTRACTS

BY
HOWARD W. CALDWELL, A. M.
PROFESSOR OF AMERICAN HISTORY IN THE
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA

VOLUME I.

AINSWORTH & COMPANY
378-388 WABASH AVE.
CHICAGO

COPYRIGHTED, 1900.
BY
J. H. MILLER.

CONTENTS. PAGE.
Introduction  v .
The Founding of the Colonies  1
The Development of Union Among the
Colonies  25
Causes of the American Revolution  47
Steps in the Formation of the United States
Constitution  '  71
Interpretation of the Constitution; Nation
ality  99
Slavery in the United States, 1  123
Slavery in the United States, II  147
The Civil War and Reconstruction  171
A Study in American Foreign Relations and
Diplomacy  195
A Study in Ecocomic History  219

Vi. INTRODUCTION.
The next and most important matter is to
bring the students into contact with the orisi-
nal material as often and as completely as possi
ble. For this purpose, of course the "sources"
must be accessible, and as far as possible in
the hands of every pupil. It should be noted
here again that it is not expected that the
larger part even of the facts of history can be
obtained from these sources, so a good narra
tive text must be at hand, and in constant use.
The "sources" are to be used for the purpose
of illustrating how the narrative history was
formed; but more especially for the mental
training which may be obtained from their use.
The same document or illustrative extract
should be in the hands of every member of the
class that each may have the benefit of the
criticism of all.
With the material then in the hands of the
class, the first question will be to determine as
far as possible its value. To do this necessitates
that we find out whether the document is what it
purports to be; then to determine whether we
have a correct copy of it. Next we must find
out who wrote it, and under what circum
stances. Finally, the character of the author
will come under discussion. Did he have the
opportunity to know ? Was he able, honest, ed
ucated? Was he writing for partisan ends, or
did he attempt to tell the exact truth? These
are a few of the tests we must apply to our
material, if we are to know its real value.
Perhaps the most important question of all will
be, did the writer know of his own personal
knowledge, or did he gain his information
from hearsay? After we have determined the

INTRODUCTION VU.
value of our "source," we next proceed to
analyze it, and to find out just what the writer
meant. Here we must notice the use and
meaning of words at the time the document
was written, and note any changes at the pres
ent time, so that we may get just the idea in
tended to be conveyed. A series of questions
will often greatly help in this analysis. The
ones given in the text are only intended to be
suggestive, and so may be supplemented by
others, or limited by omissions.
The next step will be to classify and arrange
our knowledge. In the writer's opinion this
is the hardest, as well as the most important,
part of the %vork. A logical arrangement
must be insisted on. A careful outline must
be prepared, containing a page reference to
every point in the notes. It is only by this
careful preparation that accuracy in thinking
or in writing can ever be secured. When this
work is completed, then the last step in the
plan can be taken with great ease and facility,
for then the whole mind and strength can be
concentrated on the composition. The mem
ory under such circumstances is not burdened
with carrying all the details. They are indi
cated in the outline and in the notes to which
it refers. It goes without saying that every
piece of student work when completed should
be tested by comparing it with the best narra
tive texts, or with the teacher's knowledge.
One final idea should be suggested. Each
of these studies covers many years of time.
The evolution of the topic has been kept
in mind in making the extracts. In work-
mo- nn the material then into papers and

VIU. INTRODUCTION.
reports, the teacher should see that the pupil
has noted and understood the changes and the
reasons therefor. For example, if the topic
be the "Economic History" of the United
States, great pains should be taken to call the
attention to the changes in belief in regard to
the tariff, or internal improvements. Let
every effort be bent to discovering the causes
of these changes. If Webster cease to be a
free trader, the reason for the change should
be found if possible. If the South oppose in
ternal improvements, let the cause be un
earthed. These studies, then, are committed to my
fellow teachers in the hope that they may aid
them a little in solving the diificult problem
of how to get our children to understand their
own history, and to get such an understand
ing in such a way as to make them men
tally and morally stronger, that they may be
better prepared to meet the exceedingly diffi
cult questions which will confront the coming
generation. The writer has no extravagant
ideas or expectations in regard to the trans
forming power of these studies. He simply
nopes and believes that they will be found to
be an aid.
H. W. C.

American History Studies

No, 1.

SEPTEMBER, 1897.

THE

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA.

Yearly Subscription, 25 cents. Single Copy 5 cents.

AINSWOETH & COMPANY,
378-388 Wabash Ave.,
Chicago, III.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

EDITOR'S PREFACE.
^A TfERY little space will be given this year
¦^^4 to narrative text, or to method. Copi-
¦^ ^ ous extracts will be made from the
sources. The aim will be to choose the ex
tracts in such a way that they may to a great
extent tell their own story. In the ten num
bers of the Monthly it is intended to illustrate
ten phases of American history by calling in
contemporaries to speak for themselves. Of
f onrse these extracts are expected to do little
else than whet the appetite for more. It is
hoped that the spirit of original research ni:iy
be intensified in this way to such an extent
that the reader may wish to go to the more
'¦vtended compilations of sources. Professor
Jiarc's new work, "American History as Told
by Contemporaries," in four volumes, will meet
the want of many. Many extracts may be
found in the Monthly which could not have
been laid before its readers had not this com
pilation been available. Niles' "Documents!
Illustrative of the American Revolution" is also
a valuable and convenient collection of sources
bearing on the American Revolution. Profes
sor Woodburn's revision of Johnston's "Ameri
can Orations" has increased the usefulness of
that valuable work. It now consists of four
volumes of the best speeches on all political
topics made by American statesmen. The
reader of these articles will thus recognize that
they contain only an insignificant fraction of
the available material, but it is hoped that
thesf' papers may thiovv light on a tew of the

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 3
many great questions in the development of the
life and thought of the American people. May
we not at least hope that those who cannot
have access to the more elaborate works, or
those whose time is too limited to use them,
may find something to aid them in these briefer
extracts? To get the greatest value from this work the
writer believes that definite, systematic work
is necessary. On the whole, tlie plan outlined
in the September and October numbers of the
Journal of last year is believed to be a de
sirable one. Questions will accompany each
paper this year. Tliey will aim to direct the
thought to the most important points in the
extracts, and to bring out the hidden meanings.
The new reader may perhaps understand the
method from a few explanatory sentences. In
the first place, a written answer should be jire-
pared for every question, accompanied by the
page reference to the proof for the answer.
Tlien an outline sliould be prepared arranging
in proper and logical order the Isnowledge
which has been accumulated in answering the
questions. This second step is followed by the
third, which consists in writing a paper follow
ing the "outline" and based on the answers to
the questions for the "material" or matter
which it contains. In brief, we first gather
our "material," then make an "outline," and
finally write our "narrative" history. It is be
lieved that those who will conscientiously fol
low this plan will by the end of the year have
gained much in power, in knowledge of method,
and in general culture and information.
More or less explanatory matter will be in
troduced into the extracts, but in all cases
it will be inclosed in brackets [ ]. The editor
will, however, in general leave the contempo
rary writers to tell their own story. Last year
it seemed necessary to argue for the use oi the

4 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
sources. In Nebraska at least the acceptance
of the principle is now so nearly universal that
it would be like carrying a feather bed down
stairs at a tire to elaborate further on the sub
ject. The only question now is to make the
sources available to the teachers and students
of the state. Time will determine the success
of this experiment.
Teachers who wish credit in the University of
Nebraska may secure it by keeping a note-book,
and at the end of the year submitting it for in
spection. The note-book should also show the
time given to the work from day to day. The
amount of credit will, of course, vary with the
quantity and quality of work done.

THE FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES.
The planting of the colonies may be said in
general to extend from 1600 to 1700. > By the
latter date they were firmly established and the
lines of their movement well determined. The
social, -religious, political, educational, and in
dustrial life must all be considered in our study
Also the purposes of colonization and the char
acter of the emigrants, as well as the Indians,
are factors in our study. Selections, therefore,
have been made to illustrate each of these prob
lems. 1. Reasons for colonization.
Then shall her Majesties dominions be enlarged, her high-
nesse ancient titles justly confirmed, all odious idlenesse from
this our Realm utterly banished, divers decayed towns re
paired, and many poor and needy persons relieved, and
estates of such as now live in want shall be embettred, the
ignorant and barbarous idolaters taught to know Christ, the
innocent defended from their bloodie tyrannicle neighbors,
the diabolicale custome of s.icTificing humane creatures abol
ished. .—1582. Hir Geo. Peckham in Hakluyt;
Voyages, etc.

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 5
ayming at the glory of God, the propagation of the
gospell of Christ, the conversion of the Indians, and the enlarg-
nuin I uf the iliug's Majesty's dominions in America. . .
—Hart, I, p. 190.
2. The emigrants: Class, laws concerning.
1582. — Sir Geo. Peckham proposed to get
rid of
a great number of men which do now live idely at home, and
are burthuous, chargeable, and to the common annoy of the
whole state. — Hakluyt.
1637. — No persons being Subsidy Men [liable for taxes] or
•of the value of Subsidy Men shall emigrant. — Proclamation,
Chas. I.
You are to take . . such a, course . . that
vagrants and others who remain here noxious and unprofit
able, may be soe transplanted to the generall advantage of
¦the publique as well as the particular commoditie of our
Forraine Plantacons. — 1660. Instructions for the Councill for
Porraigne Plantacons. From Documents relating to New
Yo7-k History.
And probably many vagrants agreed with
Charles 11., for, in 1679, two bright Dutch trav
elers tell us of a "Godless Emigrant Ship"
bound for New York.
In fine it was a Babel. I have never in my life heard of
such a disorderly ship. It was confusion without end. I
have never been in a ship where there was so much vermin,
which was communicated to us. . . . There were some
bunks and clothes as full as if they had been sown. But ,'
must forbear. — Long Island Hist. Society, Memoirs.
On the other side, hear Eev. Francis Higgin-
Bon, 1629:
The passage was through God's blessing , . short
and speedy— 6 weeks and 3 days, healthful to our passengers,
being freed from the great contagion of the scurvie and other
maledictions, whkh in other passages ... had taken
away the lives of many ; and withal, a pious and Christian-
like passage ; for I suppose passengers will seldom find a
company of more religious, honest and kynd seamen than we
had. We constantly served God morning and evening by
reading and expounding a chapter, singing, and prayer.
And the Sabbath was solemnly kept by adding . . •

6 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
preaching twice and catechising. And in our great need we
kept 2 solemn fasts . Let all that love and use 'fast
ing and prayer take notice that it is as prevailable by sea as
by land, whensoever it is faithfully performed. — Quoted in
Hart, I, p. 194, from Thomas Hutchinson's Collections.
8. The Indians.
Peckham, 1582, says:
All Savages . as soon as they shall begin but a lUtU
to taste of civility will take marvellous delight in any garment,
be it neverso simple and will take incredible pains-
for such a trifle. . Now to the end it may appear
that this voyage is not undertaken altogether for the peculiar
commodity of ourselves . it shall fall out in proof
that if in respect of all the commodities they can
yeelde us that they should but receive this only bene
fit of Christianity, they were more than fully recompenced.
Wee got for trifles neer 1100 Bever skinnes, 100-
Martins, and neer as many Ottus. — Captain J, Smith in "A
Description of New England."
Governor Winslow, 1621, says they were
"very trusty, quick of apprehension, ripe-wit led,
just." Penn, in 1683, testifies that
he will deserve the name of wise who outwits them in any
treaty about a thing they understaTid. . Do not
abuse them, but let them have justice and you win them. —
Quoted from Janney's Life of Penn.
4. Mechanism of colonization.
The colonization companies in England vfpre-
certainly rare enthusiasts. It is amusing lo
notice in the proceedings of the Council for
^ew England, 1622, the following item:
It is agreed that ye Councell meet the Morrow . at
Sr. Ferd: Gorges Lodgings for conferring about ye forme of
a patent betweene 7 and 8 o'clock in ye morneing.
The royal generosity of the kings in giving
away continents is well illustrated by this ac
count of how the above company disposed of
New England, 1623:
There were presented to the Kings most excellent MaMe a.
Plot of all the Coasts and lands of New England devided

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES (
into twenty parts each part conteyning two shares, And
twenty lotts conteyning the said double shares made upj> in
little bales of waxe, And the names of twenty Pattentees by
whom these lotts were to be drawne. — From Proceedings
American Antiquarian Society.
Having given the lands to the companies,
these must settle them. The proposal of the
proprietors of Carolina in 1663 illustrates the
method, and the expectations:
'Wee will grante to every present Undrtaker for his oune head,
100 acres of land, to him and his heires forever, to bo held
in free and common Soccage, & for every man Sarv* y' he
shall bringe or send thith"" yt is fitt to bare Armes, armed wth
a good fierlocke Musket, performed boare, 12 bullets to y*
pound, and w'h 20 lb. of powder & 20 lb. of Bullets, 50 acres
of land.— flari, /, S97.
The charters show the crude geographical
ideas and the dangers inherent in promiscuous
grants. In the instruction given by Charles U.,
in 1660, to the first Council for Foreign Planta
tions we find the following unconscious esti
mate of this chaos:
You shall informe yourselves by the best wayes and meanes
you can of the state and condicon of all Forraigne Planta-
cions, and by what comissions or authorities they are and
have bene governed and disposed of; and are to procure
copies of all such comissions and graunts
that you may be the better able to understand judge and ad
minister. — Documents, New York.
In 1621 the Virginia Company, of London,
tells us how they sent over fifty young women
to be given in marriage for "one hundred
and flftie pounds of the best leafe tobacco
for each of them ;" for, they add, "we have used
extraordinary care and diligence in the choice
of them, and have received none of whom we
have not had good testimony of theire honest
life and cariadge."
In 1660 Charles 11., in his instructions for the
first Council for Foreign Plantations, has the
following:

a AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
You are to apply your selves to all prudential meanes foi
the rendering those dominions usefull to England and Eng
land helpfull to them, and for the bringing the severall Col
onies and Plantacons, within themselves, into a more certaine
civill and uniforme of goveremt and for the better ordering
and distributeing of publique justice among them. — Docu
ments, New York.
5. Political life.
James, by the Grace of God, King of England, Scotland,
France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c., whereas Sir
Thomas Gates . . . (and others) consisting of certain
Knights, Gentlemen, Merchants, and other adventurerss, have
been humble suitors unto us, that We would vouchsafe unto
them our License, to make Habitation in that part
of America commonly called Virginia, . situate
between four and thirty Degrees of Northerly Lati
tude . . . and five and forty Degrees of the same Lati
tude, . We, greatly commending, their
Desires . . which may hereafter tend to
the Glory of his Divine Majesty, . . and in time bring
the Infidels and Savages . to human civility, and to
a settled and quiet government: Do, &c., agree. . . . —
Poore, II, 1888. Charter, 1606.
We . do Give, Grant and Confirm t-o our
trusty and well-beloved subjects, Robert, Earl of Salisbury,
. Robert, Lord Viscount Lisle, ... Sir Humph
rey Weld, Lord Mayor of London, . . . George Piercy,
Esq., Sir Edward Cecil, Knight, -Dr. Meadows,
. Captain Pagnam . Geo. Bolls, Esq., Sher
iff of London, Wm. Crasbaw, Clerk, Batohelor of Divinity,
. . Thomas Harris, Gentleman, . Geo. Walker,
Sadler, John Swinhow, stationer, Wm. Brown, shoemaker,
Frances Binley, minister, Richard Shepherd,
¦ preacher, William Shirley, haberdasher, Wm. Gibbs, mer
chant, Thomas Gypes, cloth-maker, John Dike, fishmonger,
. . . Christopher Vertue, vintner, . . the Company
of Goldsmiths, the Company of Brewers Robert
Chening, yeoman, that they shall be one Body or
Commonalty perpetual "having that part of America called
Virginia . " [description follows, but it is too long
to quote]. — Charter, 1609. Poore, Charters.
1610. "Virginia. — Sir Thomas Gates draws
the character of the first settlers. There was

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 9
a great shipwrack in the continent of Va. by the tempest of
dissention : every man overvaluing his own worth, would be a
Commander: every man underprising an others value, denied
to be commanded. . The next fountaine of woes was
secure negligence, and improvidence, when every man sharked
for his present bootie, but was altogether carlesse of succeeding
penurie. . Unto idlenesse you may joyne treasons,
wrought by those unhallowed creatures that forsooke the Col
ony. . Unto Treasons, you may joyne covetousnesse
in the Mariners, who partly imbezzled the provis
ions, partly prevented our trade with the Indians, making the
matches in the night, and forestalling our market in the day.
Cast up this reckoning together : want of government, store
of idlenesse, their expectations frustrated by the traitors, their
market spoyled by the Mariners, our nets broken, the deere
chased, our boats lost, our hogs killed, our trade with the In
dians forbidden, some of our men fled, some murthered, and
most weakened, and indanngered, famyne and
sicknesse by all these meanes increased. — Hart, I, S06-S08.
1619. Virginia. — We have an official "Ee-
porte of the . . . General Assembly convened at
James City, in Virginia, July 30, 1619, consist
ing of the Governor, the Counsell of Estates,
and two Burgesses elected out of cache Incor
poration and Plantation, and being dissolved
the 4th of August."
The most convenient place we could finde to sitt in was the
Quir of the Churche Where Sir George Yeardley, the Gov
ernor, being sitt down in his accustomed place, those of the
Counsel of Estate sate nexte him on both handes, except
oneiy the Secretary then appointed Speaker, who sate right
before him, John Twine, Clerke of the General assembly,
being placed ne.vit the Speaker, and Thomas Pierse, the Ser
geant, standing at the barre, to be ready for any Service the
A.tisembly should command him. But forasmuche as men's
affaires doe little prosper where God's service is neglected .
a prayer was said. Prayer being ended, to the in-
tente that as we had begun at God Almighty, so we might pro
ceed with awful and due respecte towards the Lieutenant,
our most gratious and dread Soveraigne. . . [The
Assembly proceeded immediately to pass laws "Against Idle
ness, Gaming, durunkenes & excesse in apparell" within
three days.] — Colonial Records of Virginia.

10 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIBSk,
1620. Massachusetts. — Eev. John Eobinson
wrote his adviCe after the Pilgrim colonists,
whom he could not accompany.
Whereas you are to become a Body Politick . . and
are not furnished with Persons of special Eminency
to be chosen by you into Office of Government ; Let your
Wisdome and Godliness appear not onely in choosing such
Persons a« do intirely love . the common Good; but
also in yielding unto them all due Honour and Obedience in
their lawful Administration, not beholding in them the Ordi
nariness of their Persons, but God's Ordinance for your
Good ; . and this Duty you may the more willingly,
and ought the more conscionably to perform, because you
are . . to have them for your ordinary Governours
which you yourselves shall make choice of for that Work. —
Hazard, Collections.
1620. — Mayflower Compact.
This day, before we came to harbor, observing some not well
affected to unity and concord it was thought good
there should be an association and agreement to
submit to such government and governors as we should by
common consent agree to make and choose.
In ye name of God, Amen. We . the loyall sub
jects of our dread Soveraigne Lord King James have-
ing undertaken, for ye glorie of God, and advancemente of
ye Christian faith and honour of our king & countrie, a voy
age to plan ye first colonic in ye Northeue parts of Virginia.
Doe by these presents in ye presence of God, and
one of another, covenant & combine our selves togeather into a
civill body politick; for our better ordering, and preservation
k furtherance of ye ends aforesaid ; and by vertue hearof to
enacte, constitute and frame such just & equall lawes
as shall be thought most meete & convenient for ye generall
good of ye colonie: unto which we promise all due submis
sion and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunder
subscribed our names at Cap-Codd ye 11 of November , .
Ano Dom. 1620. — Winthrop, History of Mass.
1632. — Governor Winthrop tells us in his
Journal that (2-17-163f)
The governour and assistants called before them divers of
Watertown. . The occasion was, for that a warrant
being sent to Watertown for levying of £8 . the pas
tor and elder, etc., assembled the people and delivered their

FOUNDING or THE COLONIES 11
opinions, that it was not safe to pay moneys after that sort,
for fear, of bringing themselves and posterity into bondage. . .
After much debate, they acknowledged their fault.
The ground of their error was, for that they took this govern
ment to be no other but as of a mayor and aldermen, who
have not power to make laws or raise taxations without the
people; but understanding that this government was rather
in the nature of a parliament, and that no assistant could be
chosen but by the freemen . and therefore at every
general court they had free liberty . to de
clare their grievances they were fully satisfied; and
so their submission was accepted, and their offence par
doned." .
1634. — The general court came to a deadlock.
So when they could proceed no farther, the whole court
agreed to keep a day of humiliation to seek the Lord, which
accordingly was done, in all the congregations. [And then
when they met again] although all were not satisfied
yet no man moved aught about it ; . . . [and thus Puri
tan theology ruled and softened Puritan politics]. — Win-
throp's Journal.
1635.
At this court, one of the depiities was questioned for
. . affirming that the power of the governor was but
ministerial, etc. He had also much opposed the magistrates,
and slighted them, and used many weak arguments against
the negative voice, as himself acknowledged upon record.
He was adjudged by all the court to be disabled for three
years from bearing any public office. — Winthrop, History,
1637. — For an interesting case of political di
vision and party manipulation, see Hart, I, pp.
378-9. 1639. — Governor Winthrop gives us this very
interesting view of theocratic government:
When the people have chosen men to be their rulers, and
to make their laws, and bound themselves by oath to submit
thereto, now to combine together . . in a public peti
tion to have any order repealed, which is not repugnant to
the law of God, savors of resisting an ordinance of God
amounts to a plain reproof of those whom God hath
set over them, and putting dishonor upon them, against the
tenor of the fifth commandment. — Winthrop, History,

12 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
1646. — The Presbyterians demanded a share
in the government.
We therefore desire that civill liberty and freedom be forth
with granted to all truely English, equall to the rest of their
countrymen . . and as all freeborne enjoy in our native
country. Further, that none of the English nation,
who at this time are too forward to be gone, and very back
ward to come hither, be banished, unless they break the
known lawes of England in so high a measure as to deserve
BO high a punishment . . and we likewise desire that
no greater punishments be inflicted upon offenders than are
allowed and met by the laws of our native country. — Hutch
inson. 1653. — ^In this year Massachusetts furnished
the first American example of the nullification
of a federal act — i, e,, of the New England Con
federation. It can be noe lesse then a contradiction to affeirme the Sn-
preame power ; which wee take to bee the Generall Courts
of every Jurisdiction Can bee commanded by others an ab-
surditie in polliey e ; That an Intire gov' r' ment and Jurisdiction
should prostitute itselfe to the comaund of Strangers ; a Scan-
dall in Religion that a generall court of Christians should bee
oblidged to acte and engage upon the faith of six Delligates
against theire consience all which must be admitted. — Ply-
mouth Records.
1639. Connecticut. — "Fundamental Orders"^
made by "a Gen'all Cort at Harteford."
This constitution consists of eleven articles,
but the lack of space necessitates very brief
quotations. we the Inhabitants and Residents of
Windsor, Harteford and Wethersfield . doe
conjoyne our selves to be as one Publike State or Common
wealth , to mayntayne the liberty and
purity of the gospell . as also in our Civill Affaires
to be guided and governed according to such Lawes, Rules,
Orders and decrees as shall be made . as foUoweth :
(1.) It is ordered that there shall be yerely two-
generall J.ssemblie3 ; . the first shall be called the
Courte of Elections [to choose officers].
(5.) Also the other General Courte in September shall b»
for make ing of lawes. . . .

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 13
(10.) It is Ordered . that every Generall Courte
shall consist of the Governor ,ind 4 other
Magistrats at lest, with the major p'te of the deputyes of the
severall Townes legally chosen. — Poore, Charters
and Constitutions ; also Hart, I.
New York had a reform party and movement
in 1650, and their leaders have left us their
ideas of reform and good government. Coloni
zation was not begun properly ; for it was merely accidental, and
was not intended. Trade is more suited
for slaves than freemen, in consequence of the restriction*
upon it and the annoyances which accompany the exercise of
the right of inspection [For years, too, not] any
thing large or small, — worth relating, was done, built or made^
which concerned or belonged to the commonalty, the church.
excepted. — New York Historical Society, Collections.
Care ought to be taken of the public property as well ec
clesiastical as civil. There should be a publio-
school, so that first of all in so wild a country,
when there are many loose people, the youth be well taught
and brought up, not only in reading and writing, but also in-
the knowledge and fear of the Lord. . There ought
also to be an alms house, and an orphan asylum, and other
similar institutions the country must also be pro
vided with godly, honorable and intelligent rulers who are not
very indigent, or indeed, are not very covetous. . —
Documents relating to New York Colonial History.
That none shall be admitted freemen or free Burgessea
within our Town . but such Planters as are membera
of some or other of the Congregational Churches nor shall
any but such be chosen to Magistracy or to Carry on anv part
of Civil Judicature, or as deputies or assistants, to have power
to Vote In establishing Laws, and making or Repealing them
or to any Chief Military Trust or Office. Nor shall any But
such Church Members have any Vote in any such elections ;
Tho' all others admitted to be Planters have Right to their
proper Inheritance, and do and shall enjoy all other Civil
Liberties and Privileges. . — Records of the Town of
Newark, N. J.
6. Characteristics of colonial life.
Massachusetts. — John Endicott wrote ta
Charles II. in 1661:

14 AMERICAN HISTORY STDDIHS.
y^our Servants are true Men, Fearers of God and of the
King, not given to change, zealous of Government and order,
orthodox and peacable in Israel ; we are not seditious as to
the Interest of Caesar, nor Schismaticks as to the matters of
Religion ; We distinguish between Churches and theii Im
purities, between a living Man, though not without Sickness
or Infirmity, or no man ; Irregularities either in ourselves or
others we desire to be amended. [A most excellent descrip
tion.] — Hazard, Historical Collections.
Samuel Sewall, in 1002, enters in his diary
the ominous note that
A Bill is sent in about calling a Fast and Convocation of
Ministers that may be led in the right way as to the Witch
crafts. [And the next page we read about] 7 Balls of Fire
that mov'd and mingled each with other. . — Diary of
Sewell in Mass. Hist. ISociety Collections.
In 1631 Winthrop's diary gives us this item:
At this court a servant being convict
of most foul, scandalous invectives against our churches and
government, was censured to be whipped, lose his ears, and
be banished the plantation, which was presently executed.
Connecticut. — In the true Blue Laws of 1672
we read:
If any Man or Woman be a Witch they shall be
put to death.
[And] forasmuch as the good education of Children is of
singular behoof and benefit to any Colony, and whereas many
Parents and Masters are too indulgent and negligent.
If any man have a stubborn or rebellious Son sixteen
years of age, which will not obey . his Father or
Mother then may his Father or Mother, being his
natural Parents lay hold on him, and bring him to the Magis
trates assembled in Court, and notifie that their Son
is Stubborn and Rebellious, and will not obey their voice and
chastisement, but lives in sundry notorious Crimes, such a Son
shall be put to death
No man shall exercise any Cruelty towards any Bruit Creat
ures which are usually kept for the use of man. . 
Laws of Connecticut.
John Josselyn, in 1674, after enumerating a
number of punitory laws, sums up New Eng-
landers:

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 16
Their great masters, as also some of their Merchants are
damnable rich ; generally all of their judgment, inexplicably
covetous and proud, they receive your gifts but as an homage
or tribute due to their transcendency, which is a fault their
Clergie are also guilty of, whose living is upon the bounty of
their hearers. . The chiefest objects of discipline, Relig
ion, and morality they want, some are of a LiiLsie-waal.-^iK 'l\.,-
position, of several professions in Religion, all like .Ethiop
ians while in the Tent, only full of ludification and injurious
dealing, and cruelty the extreamest of all vices. — Hart, I, 495.
Virginia.— In 1622 Capt. Nathaniel Butler
tells us how he
found the plantations generally seated upon meer salt marshes,
full of infectuous boggs and muddy creeks and lakes. Their
houses are generally the worst that ever I saw, the meanest
cottages in England being every way equal (if not superior)
with the most of the best.
Tobacco only was the business, and for ought that I could
hear every man madded upon that little thought or looked
for anything else. — Virginia Historical Society, Collections.
Governor Berkeley, in his official report of
1671, tells us, too, that of
commodities of the growth of our country, we never had any
but tobacco. Now for shipping we have admirable masts
and very good oaks ; but for iron ore I dare not say there is
sufficient to keep one iron mill going for seven years. —
Berkeley's Report, Henning's Statutes of Va.
Eev. John Clayton, writing on Tobacco Cul
ture in 1686, tells us that in Virginia
'tis only the barrenest Parts that they have cultivated, by tiU
ing and planting only the High-Lands, leaving the richer
Vales unstirr'd, because they understand not anything of
Draining. Therefore every three or four years they must be
for clearing a new piece of ground out of Woods, which re
quires much Labour and Toil. Thus their Plantations
run over vast Tracts of Ground, each ambitious or engrossing
as much as they can, that they maybe sure to have enough to
plant .' . . whereby the Country is thinly inhabited ; the
Living solitary and unsociable ; Trading confused and dis
persed ; besides other Inconveniences. [And moreover] reso
lute they are and conceitedly bent to follow their old Practice
and Custom, rather than to receive Directions from others,
tho' plain, easi'e and advantageous. . .—Ferce's Tracts.

16 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES,
Maryland. 1666. — Alsop's description.
He that desires to see the real Platform of a quiet and-
sober Government extant. Superiority with a meek and yet
commanding power sitting at the Helme, steering, the actions
of a State quietly, through the multitude and adversity of
Opinionous waves that diversely meet, let him look on Mary
land . the Miracle of this Age. — Hart, I, 268
Maine. — John Josselyn, in 1675, tells us of the
Maine group:
The people . . . may be divided into Magistrates, Hus
bandmen, or Planters, and fishermen; of the Magistrates some
be Royalists, the rest perverse Spirits, the like are the planters
and fishers. .
The planters have a custom of taking tobacco, sleeping at
noon, sitting long at meals sometimes four times a day, and
now and then drinking a dram of the bottle extraordinarily r
the smoking of Tobacco, if moderately v^ed refresheth the
weary much, and so doth sleep.
If a man came where they are roystering and
gulling in Wine with a dear felicity, he must be sociable and'
Roly-poly with them, taking off their liberal cups as freely,
or else be gone, which is best for him. . . . — Josselyn, in
Hart, I, 430.
7. Religion.
The charters from 1584 on put religion as
one of the chief motives of the crown in further
ing colonization. Nor was this wholly a spir
itual spirit with some, as the extract from
Peckham given above shows a most keen ap
preciation of the commercial value of Chris
tianity. But at any rate we always find the
crown zealous for conversion —
it being the hon'i of our Crowne, [wrote Chas. II. to the
Council in 1660,] and of the Protestant Religion, that all
persons in any of our Dominions should be taught the knowl
edge of God, and be made acquainted with the misteries of
Salvation. William Bradford, in 1607, tells us how the
English Puritans,
seeing themselves thus molested and that ther was no hope
of their continuance ther [in England] . resolved to
goe into ye Low-countries, wher they heard was freedom of
Religion for all men.

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 17
tAna from their wanderings and travels it came that] by
these so publick troubls, in so many eminente places, their
cause became famous, and occasioned many to look into ye
•same ; and their godly cariage and Christian behaviour was
such as left a iaep impression in the minds of many. And
though some few shrunk at these first conflicts, and sharp be
ginnings [as it was no marvell] yet many more came as with
fresh courage, and greatly animated others.
When they resolved to leave Holland for
America, to the thousand fears and ill prophe
cies,

it was answered that all great, and honorable actions, are
accompanied with great difficulties ; and must be, both eu-
terprised, and overcome with answerable courages. It was
granted ye dangers were great, but not desperate ; the diffi
culties were many, but not invincible. For though their were
many of them likly yet they were not certaine. Their
¦condition was not ordinarie; their ends were good and honor
able ; their calling lawfull, and urgente ; and therfore they
might expect ye blessing of God in their proceeding. . . —
Bradford 's History of Mass.
We foresee from the above what Eev. Peter
Bulkeley, in 1651, expressed as that to which
INew England was called.
There is no people but will strive to excell in some thing ;
what can we excell in, if not in holinesse 7 If we look to num
ber, we are the fewest ; If to strength, we are the weakest ; If
to wealth and riches, we are the poorest of all the people of
God through the whole world ; . and if we come
-short in grace and holinesse too, we are the most despicable
people under heaven strive we therefore herein
to excell and suffer not this crown to be taken away from ua.
—Hart. I, 4S2.
Massachusetts — The Massachusetts Company,
in 1629, wrote to their colonists regarding their
ministers that
because their Doctrine will hardly bee well esteemed whose
persons are not reverenced, wee desire that both by your
owne Example and by commanding all others to do the like,
¦our Ministers may receive due Honor. — Am. Antiquarian
Society P^roceedings.
Only eight years later Governor Winthrop,
¦when examining Anne Hutchinson, says to her:

IS AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Your conscience you must keep or it must be kept for yoni
— [a most comprehensive critique on Puritan theology]—
Hutchison, History of Mass. Bay Colony.
No time was lost in passing laws by which
the church forced reverence from all. And
things went on this way until, in 1660, Edward
Burrough, an English Quaker, gained the king's
ear for the miseries of the Massachusetts
Quakers. One horrible example is enough:
Two beaten with pitched ropes, the blows amounting to an
hundred thirty-nine, by which one of them was brought near
unto death, much of his body being beat like unto a jelly, and
one of their own Doctors, a Member of their Church, who
saw him said, ' It would be a Miracle if ever he recovered, he
expecting the flesh should rot off the bones'; who afterwards
was banished upon pain of death. — Hart, I, 484.
In 1659 Mary Dyer, a condemned Quakeress,
wrote a justification to the General Court:
Was ever the like Laws heard of among a People that pro
fess Christ came in the flesh? And have such no other
weapons but such Laws, to fight against Spiritual Wickedness
withall, as you call it ? -;-Hart, I, 479.
John Cotton, as sketched by John Norton in
1652, illustrates perfectly the solid and attract
ive parts of the Puritan minister:
He was a general Scholar, studious to know all things, the
want whereof might in one of his profession be denominated
ignorance. He was a man of much Communion
with God, and acquaintance with his own heart, observing-
the daily passages of his life. He had a deep sight into the
Mystery of God's grace, and man's corruption, and large ap
prehensions of these things. . He began the Sabbath
at evening [on Saturday] ; therefore then performed Family-
duty after supper, being larger than ordinary in Exposition,
after which he Catechised his children and servants, and then
returned into his Study. . . Upon his return from
Meeting he returned again into his Study .- unto his
private devotion : where (having a small repast carried him
up for his dinner) he continued till the tolling of the bell.
The publick service being over, he withdrew for a space to
his prementioned Oratory for his sacred addresses nnto God
as in the forenoon ; then came down, repeated the sermon in

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 19
the iaimily, prayed, after supper sang a Psalm, and towards
bed-time betaking himself- again to his Study, he closed the
day with prayer. . . In his Study he neither sat down
unto, nor arose from his meditations without prayer: whilst
his eyes were upon his book his expectation was from God.
He had learned to study because he had learned to pray.—
Hart, I, SS7-S8.
Two entertaining Dutch travelers in New
England in 1680 give us a very amusing, but
rather caustic, account of religion in Boston.
One of the ministers being sick, a day of fasting
and prayer was observed.
In the first place a minister made a prayer in the pulpit, of
full two hours in length ; after which an old minister deliv
ered a sermon an hour long, and after that a prayer was made,
and some verses sung out of the psalms. In the afternoon,
three or four hours were consumed with nothing except
prayers, three ministers relieving each other alternately ; when
one was tired, another went up into the pulpit. There was
no more devotion than in other churches, and even less than
at New York ; no respect, no reverence ; in a word, nothing
but the name of independents ; and that was all.
The ministers seemed to be
persons who seemed to possess zeal but no just knowledge of
Christianity. The auditors were very worldly and inattentive.
The best of the ministers ... is a very old man, named
John Eliot.
They are all Independents in matters of religion, if it can
be called religion ; many of them perhaps more for the pur
poses of enjoying the benefit of its privileges than for any re
gard to truth and godliness. All their religion consists
in observing Sunday, by not working or going into the taverns
on that day ; but the houses are worse than the tavernV No
stranger or traveler can therefore be entertained on a Sunday,
which begins at sunset on Saturday, and continues until the
same time on Sunday. At these two hours you see all their
countenances change. Saturday evening the constable goes
around into all the taverns of the city stopping all
noise and debauchery, which frequently causes him to stop
his search, before his search causes the debauchery to stop.
There is a penalty for cursing and swearing, such as they
please to impose. . . Nevertheless, you discover little
difference between this and other places. Drinking and
fighting oyer there not less than elsewhere; and as to trntli

20 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
and true godliness, you must not expect more of them than
of others. — Long Island Hist. Society, Memoirs.
Alas, the children were not all they should
be, either. Chief Justice Sewall tells us how
for his playing at Prayer-time and eating when Return Thanks
he whipped his boy Joseph "pretty smartly." [We do not
wonder that even Puritan theology failed to repress hunger,
but it is a shock to find that there was enough juvenility left
to assert itself at such a critical moment.]
Rev. Nathaniel Wood, in 1647, sums up best
the Puritan view of toleration in its most viru
lent form.
To tolerate more these indifferents is not to deale indiffer
ently to God. The power of all Religion and Ordinances, lies
in their purity : their purity is their simplicity ; then are
mixtures pernicious. That state is wise, that will improve
*11 paines and patience rather to compose, then tolerate dif
ferences in Religion. He that is willing to tolerate any religion,
or discripant way of Religion, besides his own, unless it be in
matters meerly indifferent, either doubts of his own, or is
not sincere in it. He that is willing to tolerate any unsound
Opinion, that his own may also be tolerated, though never
-so sound, will for a need hang God's Bible at the Devills
girdle. Every toleration of false Religion, or Opinions hath
as many errors and sins in it, as all the false Religions and
Opinions it tolerats and one sound one more. That State
that wiU give Liberty of Conscience in matters of Religion,
must give Liberty of Conscience and Conversation in their
MoraU Laws, or else the Fiddle will be out of tune.
There is no rule given by God for any State to give an affirm
ative Toleration to any false Religion, or Opinion whatso
ever ; they must connive in some cases, but may not concede
in any. — Hart, I, 394^95.
Maryland. — It is a relief to turn from this to
a colony where toleration was more worthily
conceived of. In 1633 Lord Baltimore summed
up his long instructions to the colonists with
the injunction:
In fine . ' bee very carefull to do justice t* every
man w'th'out partiality [and the result was, as Alsop wrote
in 1666, that] here the Roman Cathcflick and the Protestant
Episcopal . . concur in an unanimous parallel of
friendship, and inseparable love infugled unto one another.

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 21
The several Opinions and Sects meet not
together in mutinous contempts but with a rever
end quietness obeys the legal commands of Authority.
In 1649 the Maryland Assembly ruled that
blaspheming, cursing, denial of or "reproachfull
speeches, words or language concerning" the
Trinity should be punished with death and fori
feiture of goods. But in the same proclamation
we read that
noe person . . professing to beleive in Jesus Christ,
shall from henceforth bee any waies troubled. Molested or
discountenanced for or in respect of his or her religion nor
in the free e.xercise thereof . nor any way compelled
to the beleife or exercise of any other Religion against his or
her consent, so as they be not unfaithfull to the Lord Pro
prietary, or molest or conspire against the civill governem't
. — Archives of Maryland, by Browne.
Virginia. —
In Virginia the families . . . being seated . . .
at such distances from each other, many of them are very
remote from the House of God, though placed in the middest
of them. Many Parishes as yet want both Churches and
Gleabes, and I think not above a fifth part of them are sup-
plyed with Ministers, where there are Ministers the people
meet together Weekly, but once upon the Lord's day, and
sometimes not at all, being hindered by the length
or tediousness of the way, through extremities of heat in
Summer, frost and Snow in Winter, and tempestuous weather
in both. . . —Hart, I, S95.
Rhode Island. — To be contrasted with Ward
on toleration we have E. Williams, writing in
1670. Forced worship stinks in God's nostrils. In these flames
about religion there is no other prudent, christian
way of preserving peace in the world but by permission of
differing consciences. . . — Mass. Hist. Society, Col-
ledions. And Governor Peleg Sandford, in his o£Bcial
report, in 1680, writes:
We leave every Man to walke as God shall persuade their
hartes, and doe actively and passively yield obedience to the
Civill Magistrate and doe not actively disturb the Civill peacs

22 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
and have liberty to frequent any meetings of worship
for their better instruction and information. • . —
Greene, History of Rhode Island.
Connecticut. — Blue laws of 1672:
If any person . Blaspheme the Name of God the
Father, Son or Holy Ghost or shall curse in like
manner, he shall be put to death.
New York. — Governor Thomas Dongan, of
New York, in 1687, writes:
Here bee not many of the Church of England ; few Rora.in
Catholicks ; abundance of Quakers preachers men and Wo
men especially ; Singing Quakers, Ranting Quakers, Sabba
tarians ; Anti Sabbatarians ; some Anabaptists some Inde
pendents ; some Jews ; in short of aU sorts of opinions there
are some, and the most part of none at all. — Documentary
History of New York.
Before this, in 1679, Dankers and Slnytcr
went to religious service in New York.
As it is not strange in these countries to have men as min
isters who drink, we could imagine nothing else thaji that ha
had been drinking a little this morning. His text was, Coni'i
unto me all ye, etc., but he was so rough that even the rangli-
eet and most godless of our sailors were astonishcii.
QUESTIONS ON THE ti::;t.
1. Name the reasons given for colonizing. 2. WT>alt cTass
of emigrants came, judging from the text ? 8. What chaDjre
between 1637 and 1660 in regard to allowing emigration ? i.
What do the accounts in regard to ocean vovagcs sho-w in re
gard to character of emigrants? 5. What did the early voy
agers say regarding the Indians? 6. How did the king dis
pose of part of the land? 7. How were settlers epticed to
come to America? 8. How did the settlers in Virginia get
wives? 9. What land was granted in the first charter, 1606?
10. What classes were stockholders in the second charter,
1609? 11. When did the first House of Burgesses of Vir
ginia sit? 112. What contest in regard to taxes between the
people of Watertown and Massachusetts Bay ? 13. What can
you learn from the Mayflower compact ? 14. Meaning of the
punishment of a deputy for questioning the right of the gov
ernor to the "negative voice." 15. What did Winthrop be-
lieve in regard to his power as governor? 16. What relig.
lous denominations complained of their treatment? 17.
When and what was the first popular constitution ? 18. Can
you find any indications of a spirit of rebellion ? 19 Were
the Puritans superstitious? 20. Were their laws harsh?
their punishments? 21. Name the industries you find men-

FOUNDING OF THE COLONIES 23
rioned. 22. Were they good farmers ? 23. Trace the jour
ney of the Pilgrims from England to Plymouth. 24. Were
the Puritans tolerant? 25. What kind of a man was Rev.
John Cotton ? 26. What does the testimony prove in regard
to the morals of the colonists? 27. What peculiar attribute
do you find in Maryland? 28. What colony would you have
preferred to live in? why?
SUGGESTIVE QUESTIONS.
a. How would you explain the intolerant spirit so often
manifested 7 b. Point out institutions existing now that had
their beginning in IVth century, c Did the theory and the
practice of the Puritan coincide? d. Trace the developmeui
of witchcraft. Do you find its basis in lile depicted in above
extracts? e. Name the lessons you may learn from this
itudy'
H. W. Caldwell,
Uiiirersity of Nebrai<Jca.

American History Studies

No, 2.

OCTOBER, 1897.

THE DEYELOPMENT OF UNION
AMONG THE COLONIES.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W. CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA.

J. H. MILLER, Publisher,
LINCOLN, NEBRASKA.

Yearly Subscription, 40 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

Published Monthly, Except July and August.
Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office, Lincoln, Nebraska,
U. S. A.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

DEVELOPMENT OF UNION AMONG THE
COLONIES. I.
^HE several colonies were planted at dif
ferent times, by different interests, and in
some cases by different races. The geog
raphy of the country was such that there was
very little communication and intercourse be
tween the various colonies for many years. The
soil and climate also tended to produce diver
gent interests and civilizations. The intolerant
religious spirit of the age lent itself also to the
same tendency. On the whole, one sometimes
wonders that the colonies came together as
easily as they did in support of interests that
were not always clearly in common.
It is very difficult frequently to find an ex
tract that is sufficiently condensed and pointed.
which may be cited, to bring out some force that
tended to prevent union or was, on the other
hand, aiding it. Especially have I found it dif
ficult to get quotable extracts on the effects of
geography. In general it is by inference only
that one gathers his conclusions. In the ex
tracts given it has in general seemed best to
give those that brought out the salient move
ments looking toward union, rather than to give
those that emphasized the divergent tendencies
of the time. I wish to emphasize the fact that
the study of sources means that every word and
phrase is to receive careful consideration. The
value of the training consists to a considerable

DHVELOPMaNT OP UNION AMOJNU COLONIES. 27
extent 'n acquiring the ability to read betv, een
the lines, to draw inferences, to find the spirit
or motive which prompted to word or act.
It is hoped that the extracts quoted this
month may illustrate not only the fact that vari
ous attempts to unite were made, but also drive
home the character of the union possible, and
the kind of union which the colonies sought and
which the mother country attempted to force
on them. It will be an interesting exercise to
trace the expansion of the idea of union and to
classify the factors which were at work; also to
follow the changes in the nature of the union
which were outlined in the various proposals
from 1643 to 1776. Less weight has been given
to the congresses of 1765 and 1774 than might
seem necessary from their prominence. The
reason for this is that the union movement then
was rather unconscious, an accessory to the
more palpable thoughts, — first that of a redress
of grievances, and later that of independence.
The Causes of the Revolution, which will be our
subject for next month, will give us the oppor
tunity to study this period as it deserves.
The extracts this month are taken largely
from the colonial records as reprinted by the
various states. Massachusetts began this worJc
as early as 1792 and has developed it till now
her various historical publications are num
bered almost by the hundreds. New York
has also reprinted, or printed from manuscript,
thousands of pages of letters, laws, reports, and
other documents. The same is true of Connec
ticut and other states. It is from these docu
ments that we can draw and yet scarcely make
an impression in the limited space at our com
mand. I wish to thank the many who write words of
e acouragement concerning the work which we
are attempting to outline. Certainly the idea

28 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
that history may be studied in part from the
sources in our graded schools is spreading. In
some cases it is well done, as I know by receipt
of the results in the form of papers. I desire to
call the attention of teachers elsewhere to the
plan of the West; Superior, Wis., schools, where
the papers are printed in a neat little volume,
100 copies printed, costing less than $16. The
local paper published each student paper as it
was completed, then put them together at a
mere 'nominal cost. I doubt not that every
town has some local paper that would do like
wise. Principal Griffin has evidently found an
added incentive to good work, and even to real
contributions to local history in some cases.
But I wish also to say that some criticisms
come to me. One teacher suggests that the
spelling of her pupils is not improved by work
ing over the old manuscripts. Shall the spell
ing be modernized, or shall we have the old
flavor of our forefathers, trusting to some de
vice to avoid the evil, if such it be, of which
mention has been made? Will not the teachers
discuss this question pro and con in letters to
me? Perhaps a more serious danger is sug
gested by another who says: How do we know
that Mr. Caldwell can or does make extracts in
such a way as to give a true picture of the
times? How do we know that the writers he
cites are representative, are good witnesses?
Well, the mere fact that such questions can be
asked shows that in part, at least, our work is
done. The critical faculty is awake, and the
word of any one text will perhaps not neces
sarily be unhesitatingly followed hereafter. I
can only answer that I try to be fair. My judg
ment is not infallible, and my knowledge is not
encyclopedic, so I can only ask such confidence
as an honest desire deserves. By all means
correct me by every available source, and the
end that we seek will be gained.

DEVELOPMENT OF UNION AMONG COLONIES. 29
n.
As early as 1637 references may be found in
the colonial records pointing to a desire for
union among the colonies. The following ex
tracts will afford some insight into the motives
and spirit that animated them in their actions
at this time:
It ia ordered that the letter lately sent to the Governor by
Mr. Eaton, Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Haynes, Mr. Coddington, &
Mr. Brereton, . , shalbee thus answered by the Gov
ernor : that the Court doth assent to all the ppositions (propo
sitions) layde downe in the aforesaid letter, but that the an-
swere shalbee directed to Mr. Eaton, Mr. Hopkins, & Mr.
Haynes, onely excluding Mr. Coddington & Mr. Brenton, as
men not to bee capitulated wt'iall by us, either for them
selves or the people of the iland (Rhode Island) where they
inhabite, as their case standeth. * [Oct. 1, 1640.] — Massachu
setts Colonial Records, I, p. SOB.
1. At this court (7 Mo. 22 day 1642) the propositions sent
from Connecticut [to Massachusetts] about a combination,
&o were read, and referred to a committee to consider of
after the court, who meeting, added some few cautions and
new articles, and for the taking in of PHmonth (who were
now willing,) and Sir Perdinando Gorges province, and so
returned them back to Connecticut, to be considered upon
against the spring, for winter was now approaching, and
there could be no meeting before, eiia.— Winthrop, History
of New England, II, pp. lOS-lOS.
I 2. At this court (Mo. 3, 10, 1643) came the commissioners
from Plimouth, Connecticut and New Haven, viz: from
Plimouth Mr. Edward Winslow and Mr. Collins, from Con
necticut Mr. 'Haynes and Mr. Hopkins, with whom Mr.
Penwick of Saybrook joyned, from New Haven Mr. Theophi-
lus Baton and Mr. Grigson. Our court chose a committee
to treat with them viz : the governour [John Winthrop] and
Mr. Dudley, and Mr. Brodstreet, being of the magistrates ;
and of the deputies, Captain Gibbons, Mr. Tyng the treas
urer and Mr. Hathorn. These coming to consultation en
countered some difficulties, but being all desirous of union
and studious of peace, they readily yielded each to other
in such things as tended to common utility, &o, so as in
some two or three meetings they lovingly accorded upon
these ensuing articles, which, being allowed by, our eooiti

30 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
and signed by all the commissioners, were sent to be also rati
fied by the general courts of other jurisdictions ; • . • —
Winthrop, History of New England, vol. II, p. ISIf-
By reason of ye plottings of the Narigansets,
the Indians were drawn into a general conspiracie against
ye English in all parts, as was in part discovered ye yeare
before . . ; [this caused t*»i Colonies] to thinke of
means how to prevente ye same, and secure them selves.
Which made them enter into this neu union & confederation
following. [The articles follow.] — Bradford, History of
Plymouth Plantation, p. 416.
ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION.
Whereas we all came into these parts of America with the
same end and aim, namely, to advance the kingdom of our
Lord Jesus Christ, and to enjoy the liberties of the gospel
in purity with peace j and whereas by our settling, by the
wise providence of God, we are further dispersed upon the
seacoast and rivers than was at first intended, so that we
cannot, according to our desire, with convenience commu
nicate in one government : and whereas we live
encompassed with people of several nations and strange
languages, which hereafter may prove injurious to us or our
posterity ; and for as much as the natives have formerly
committed sundry insolences, . and have of late
combined themselves against us, and seeing by reason of the
sad distractions in England (which they have heard of,) and
by which they know we are hindered . . of seeking
advice, and reaping . protection, which at other
times we might well expect ; we therefore do conceive it our
bounden duty, to enter into a present consocia^
tion . . for mutual help and strength . . , that,
as in nation and religion, so in other respects, we be and
continue one, . . :
I. AVherefore it is fully agreed . . between parties
above named, . . . that they ... be called by the
name of the United Colonies of New England.
II. These united colonies enter Into a firm and
perpetual league of friendship and amity . both for
preserving and propagating the truth and liberties of the
gospel, and for . safety .
m. It ia fiirther agreed, that the plantations which at
present are or hereafter shall be settled within the limits of the
Massachusetts, shall be forever under the government of the

DBVBLOPMBNT OF UNION AMONG COLONIES. 31
Massa(3iusetts, and shall have jurisdiction among themselves
in all cases as an anHie body ; [sams provision follows
in regard to Connecticut, Plymouth, and New Haven.]
. . provided that no other jurisdiction shall . be
taken in as a distinct head or member of this confederation,
nor shall any other ... be received by any of them ;
nor shall any two . . join in one jurisdiction, without
consent of the rest, . .
IV. It is also . . . agreed, that the charge of all
just wars, . . . shall, both in men and provisions
be borne, . . . , in manner following, viz. [in propor
tion to number of males from 16 to 60 years of age.]
V. It is further agreed, that if any of these jurisdictions,
be invaded by any enemy whatsoever, upon notice
and request of any three [or two under conditions] magis
trates of that jurisdiction so invaded, the rest of the confed
erates, . . shall . send aid . . . [as fol
lows :] Massachusetts one hundred men [furnished] . . . ,
and each of the rest 45 men so armed
VI. It is also agreed, that for the managing . of
all affairs . . concerning the whole confederation, com
missioners shall be chosen [as follows :] two for the Massachu
setts, two for Plimouth, two for Connecticut, and two for
New Haven, all in church fellowship with us, . to
hear . and determine . all affairs of war
or peace, leagues, aids, charges, . . [This section also
specifies place of meeting, etc.]
VIII. . It is also agreed, that if any servant run
away from his master into any of these confederate jurisdic
tions, upon certificate of one magistrate in the
jurisdiction out of which the said servant fled, . , . the
said servant shall be delivered to his master . . . [In
general the same provision in regard to criminals.]
XI. [The last article pertains to breaches of the articles.]
Lastly, this perpetual confederation, and the several arti
cles and agreements . .' were . . certified [as
completed] at the next meeting held in Boston, (7) 7, 1643.
— Winthrop, History of New England, vol. II, p. IS If.
The English Commissioners to New England,
in 1665, pass the following, among other resolu
tions: There is no power in the charter [of Massachusetts] to
incorporate with other colonjes, nor to exercise any power

•'J AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
by that association : both belongs to the kings prerogative.
If there be any other undecent expressions & repetitions of
the word "commonwealth, " "state, " and the like, in other
pages, wee desire they may bee changed. — Massachusetts
Colonial Records, vol. IV, pt. H, p. SIS.
To this the General Court of Massachusetts
sent the following reply:
. . . And also considering that they were severall col
onjes under one king, & come from their native country for
one & the same end, & were here scattered at a great dis
tance amongst the wild salvages in a vast wilderness, had no
w-alled touues or garrisons of souldjers for their defence,
they apprehended the least they could doe was to enter into
a league of amity and union one with another, ingaging,
. . . jointly to assist each other . . . , this being
the end of their then confoederating, . . to the end
that as our distance of place one from another rendered us
weake, & layd us open to their rage and violence, so our
union might be as well to them a terror as to us strength ;
& through the goodness of God, wee have hitherto had large
experience of the great good that by this confoederation
hath redounded, not only to all his majesties subjects here
planted, but even to the natives themselves, it having been a
means to prevent much trouble & bloodshed among them
selves, so that although since that warr [the PequodJ soma
of them have . . put us to a considerable charge . ,
yet no massacre hath beene among us from that day to this,
blessed be God for it. — Massachusetts Colonial Records,
vol. IV, pt. 2, p. HSl.
Again, the General Court says that the com
missioners seem to desire
to make a flame in the country by their high favors
to discontented persons, & great countenance given to the
Road Islanders, whose first rise and continuance hath beene
such to the other colonjes as is not unknowne to any discreet
observer in these parts; and on the other hand, calling
. the United Colonjes that usurped authoritje con
trary to the light of reason, . . which therefore made
it seeme to be their speciall design to disunite the colonjes
& so to bring us unto ruine. — lb., pp. SS3-S4.
To the Assembly of Maryland, by Jacob Leisler.
A. D. 1689 J 29th September in the fort of New York.
GENTLBMBif — I have received your acceptable letter the

D^EVBLOPMENX OIT UNION AMONG COLONIES. 33
18 of this instant & communicated ns directed, wee hevc
considered the contents with due affection, & . . . em
brace with all our hearts your offers of a mutuall & amiable
correspondence with you, which we shall labor to keep &
preserve inviolable towards you, and without fail shall omitt
nothing that may appeare any wayes to your intrest peace &
welfare as we also doe with Boston & Connecticutt collony
being of the same opinion with you, that it is the onely means
to preserve . their majestie's interests. [King Will
iam and Queen Mary]. [Similar letters sent to
Mass.', Conn., etc.] — Documentary History of New York,
vol. II, p. 19.
'• Agents of four colonies and several Indiao
chiefs met in 1684 to consider union. One of
the sachems addressed the Massachusetts agent
as follows:
We all, namely, our governor, the governor of Virginia
and the Massachusetts Coloney, and Maquese, are in one
covenant. We do plant here a great tree of peace, whoso
branches spread so far as the Massachusetts Coloney, Vir
ginia, Maryland, and all that are in friendship with us and do
live in peace, unity, and tranquility, under the shade of said
tree. — Mass. Archives, XXX, p. SOS, cited in Frothingham.
Governor Treat, of Connecticut, wrote to Gov
ernor Bradstreet, July 31, 1689, in part, as fol
lows: I hope we shall be willing in the season of it, to revive the
ancient confederation upon just terms and articles, holding
forth a right consideration of our state compared with the
other colonies. — Frothingham, Rise of the U. S. Republic,
p. 87, note.
Governor Bradsteet wrote, February 3,
1689-90, in the same spirit :
All true Englishmen [ought] to lay aside their private
animosities and intestine discords, and to unite against the
common enemy. — 76., 88.
Circular to the Governors of the several proy-
inces: New Yore, Aprill 2d, 1690:
HoNBLB Sir : — [After stating danger from French and
Indians, Governor Iieister says, we] have likewise communis

34 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
cated the same to the Governor of Boston, & the ijentlemen
of Connecticutt are likewise advertised thereof, in so mncli
that wee propose for a generall assistance that such persons
as to you shall seem meet may be commissioned to treat with
them of New England, Virginia, pensilvania and Jerseys,
, that we may conclude what may conduce most to
the King's intrest, wellfare of the provinces. . . — Doo
umentary History of New York, vol. II, p. 117.
A. D. 1690 ye 30 Apprill : in N. Yorko.
Gentlembns — Last monday arrived heer the Comintioners
off [of| Boston Plimouth en Caneticot who have been taking
[talking] off several businis concurning the Indian war. . .
[Signed Jacob Ljeisler.] — lb,, p. ISS,
N. YoRKB, Primo May 1690.
At a meeting of ye commissioners of ye Province of New
York & ye coUonies of ye Massachusetts, Plymouth & Con
necticut, It is concluded . , . that each of ye CoIIonies aforesd
shall Provide and furnish ye undermenconed proporcons of
Souldiers with Answerable Provisions at their own Charges
to Be sent with all Speed: — viz:
By New Yorke four hundred  400
By Massachusetts Colony one hundred & sixty  160
By Connecticut Colony one hundred & thirty five  135
By Plymouth Colony sixty  60
By Maryland by Promise one hundred  lOO
In all eight hundred fifety five  855
Further agreed [various things mentioned] That ye Of
ficers Be required to maintain good order Amongst ye Sol
diers to discountenance & Punish Vice & as much as maybe
to Keep ye Sabbath and Maintain ye Worship of God.
Jacob Leisler.
William Stoughton.
Saml Sewell.
P. D. Lanot.
John Wallet.
Nathan Gold.
William Pbtkih.
•^Massachwitts Archives, X'XXVI, 47,

DHVBLOPMHNT OP UNION AMONG COLONIES. 35
Leisler in a letter to the governments of New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island, at
tempting to secure additional aid, said :
I hope you will not be wanting so blessed a work at this
time to please God and our gracious king. Losing the op
portunity and neglecting the season may cause the next gen.
eration to curse ns. — Frothingham, p. 9S.
Though the French colony contains, perhaps, not 30000
men capable to bear arms ; yet these are all under the des
potic command and sole direction of their Governor-Gen
eral, . . . The strength of our colonies, on the other
hand, is divided, and the concurrence of all necessary both
for supplies of men and money. Jealous they are of each
other; some ill constituted; others shaken with intestine
divisions, and if I may be allowed the expression, parsimon
ious even to prodigality. Our assemblies are diffident of
their Governors ; Governors despise their assemblies, and
both mutually misrepresent each other to the court of Great
Britain. Military measures demand secrecy and dispatch ;
but while the colonies remain divided, and nothing can be
transacted but with their universal assent, it is impossible to
maintain the one or proceed with the other. Without a gen
eral constitution for warlike operations, we can neither plan
nor execute. We have a common interest, and must have
a common council ; one head and one purse. [An extract
from a letter supposed to have been written by Gov. Living
ston of New York, and his friends Messrs. W. Smith and
Scott, nm.l— Massachusetts Hist. Society Col, series I,
vol. VII, pp. 161-62.
Mr. Nelson's memorial about the state of the north
ern colonies in America: 24 Sept : 1696.
Fifthly I am now to make another remark upon the prin-
cipall, and greatest defect and mistake, in which we have
been, and are yet under, I meane the number and independ
ency of so many small Governments, whereby our strength
is not only divided and weakened, but by reason' of their
severall interests, are become and doe in a manner esteeme
each as foreigners the one unto the other, soe that whatever
mischiefs doth happen in one part, the rest by the reason of
this disunion remaine unconcerned and our strength thereby
•weakened ; whereas wer? the Colonies of New England,

36 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Hampshire, Road Island, Conecticot, New York joined in
one, we then should be near to [ten?] or 15 for one of those
of the French in Canada, and might reasonably propose
. . to make an entire conquest of that place. .
—New York Colonial Records, vol. IV, p. 209.
MR. PBNN'S PLAN OP UNION. [1698].
A Briefe and Plaine Scheam how the English Colonies in
the North parts of America, viz: Boston, Connecticut, Road
Island New York New Jerseys, Pensilvania, Maryland, Vir
ginia and Carolina may be made more usefull to the Crowne,
and to one anothers peace and safty with an universall con
currence. 1st. That the Severall colonies before mentioned do meet
once a year, and oftener if need be, during the war, and at
least once in two years in times of peace, by their stated and
appointed deputies, to debate and resolve . . . [on
measures for public good.]
2. That in order to it two persons well qualified for sence
sobriety and substance be appointed by each Province, as
their Representatives [in Congress].
3. That the Kings Commissioner for that purpose specially
appointed shall have the Chaire and preside in the said Con-
gresse. 4. [Central meeting place.]
6. [Suggests governor of New York as King's Commis-
missioner.] 6. That their business shall be to hear and adjust all mat
ters of Complaint or difference between Province and Prov
ince. As 1st where persons quit their own Province and goe
to another, that they may avoid their just debts . .,
2d where offenders fly justice, ., 8dly to prevent
or cure injuries in point of commerce, 4th, to consider of
ways and means to support the union and safety of these
Provinces against the publick enemies In which Congresse
the Quotas of men and charges will be much easier, and
more equally sett, than it is possible for any establishment
made here to do ; for the Provinces, knowing their own con
dition and one anothers, can debate that matter with more
freedome,- and satisfaction and better adjust and ballanee
their affairs in all respects for their common safty.
71y That in times of war the Kings High Comraissionr
shall be generall or Chief Commander . — New YorJ(
Colonial Documents, vol. IV, p. 296,

DEVELOPMENT OP UNION AMONG COLONIES. 37
From the scheme of Gov. Livingston, recom
mended to the Lords of Trade, May 13, 1701:
To settle the American Governments to the greatest pos
sible advantage, it will be necessary to reduce the number of
them ; in some places to unite and consolidate ; in others to
separate and transfer ; and in general to divide by natural
boundaries instead of imaginary lines. If there should be
but one form- of government established for the North-
American provinces, it would greatly facilitate the reforma
tion of them. . . .A nobility appointed by the king
for life and made independent, would probably give strength
and stability to American governments as effectually as her
editary nobility does to that of Great Britain. — Cited in
Frothingham, p. 117.
Shirley says in a letter dated Oct. 21, 1754, to
Governor Morris, newly appointed governor of
Pennsylvania: The best advice I can give you is to lose no time for pro
moting the plan of a union of the colonies for their mutual
defence, to be concerted at home, and established by act of
Parliament as soon as possible I am laboring this
point toils viribis. — Ibid, p. 146.
Daniel Coxe, 1722, proposed that all the Brit
ish colonies be
united under a legal, regular, and firm establishment, over
which a lieutenant or supreme governor should be consti
tuted and appointed to preside on the spot, to whom the gov
ernors of each colony should be subordinate ; . . . that
two deputies should be annually elected by the council and
assembly of each province, who are to be in the nature of a
great council or general convention of the states of the col
onies [to fix on quotas of men and money which] should be
levied and raised by its own assembly in such manner as they
should judge most easy and convenient. — Cited by Froth
ingham, p. lis.
About 1725, when a proposal had been made
by the Massachusetts assembly for a convention
of all the colonies, it was pronounced by the
Board of Trade as "a mutinous proposal."— r
UutcMtisqii's Eistory of Mass., vol. Ill, p. 119,

38 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
The following extracts give us an insight into
the conditions from the standpoint of the
colonial governors:
Reasons why this great undertaking of building of New
Ports &c extending the English settlements into the Indian
country is not effected as begun by this Province alone.
6thly. We have late experience how ineffectual Her Maj
esty's circular letters in the "late war did prove, appointing
the several Governors to send Commissioners to New York
to agree upon certain quotas of men, and for a supply of
money, and tho' the Governors of Virginia and Maryland
did prevail with their people to assist us with some money,
yet could not prevail with them to send any men ; some of
the commissioners came others came not ; those that came
refused to act without the rest, and gave reason enough to
believe they were fond of the opportunity of that colour, by
various excuses, doubts, fears and jealousies ; so parted do
ing nothing. — New York Colonial Documents, vol. IV, 87S,
To carry on this design of extending the Christian settle
ments and English forts into the Indian country for the se
curity of all His Majesty's Plantations on this North Conti
nent of America ; —
I humbly begg leave to propose that it is best to be done
in time of peace with France. 1st That one form of gov
ernment be establish'd in all the neighbouring colonies on
this main continent.
That they be divided into three distinct governments — to-
wit. That Virginia and Maryland be annexed to South and
North Carolina.
That some part of Connecticut, New York, East and West
Jersey, Pennsylvania and New Castle be added together.
And that to Massachusetts be added New Hampshire and
Rhoad Island and the rest of Connecticut. — Ibid, p. 874.
The degree of union is well illustrated by the
following extract from a letter of Gov. Fletcher:
Our neighbours on the Right and left sitt at ease, they
govern by theire own Fancies, Connecticutt full of people
keep up a Comonwealth Power, oppress the better sort who
dissent from them but will ijot send a man OT sixpence t<J
em relief,

DEVELOPMENT OF UNION AMONG COLONIES. 39
And from that Collony I could march up men dry foot to
Repell our Enemies, from hence we have a voyage of fifty
leagues to Albany, In my absence the Councill here writ to
all the neighbouring CoUonies for men or money, the Repub-
liek of Connecticutt quarrell att the Superscription of the
Councills letter for want of theire proper Title. — Ibid.
Prom Pensilvania they say they have nothing to send us
but theire good wishes. East Jersey has sent us £248 and
proniiss to make itt £400 those remoter CoUonies I have
not yet heard from. Nothing in my sight but an
addition of Connecticutt and some other Colonys can sup
port us by paying equall duties to the Crown, the Acts of
Navigation are wholy violated by these out lyers.
I send this to Boston in hopes of a passage from thence if
Sr William Phips do not intecept it. — New York Colonial
Documents, vol. IV, p. IS.
The governor of New York writes as follows
o.f the conditions in America:
Notwithstanding their Majst Lettis Mandatorieto the sev.
eral governments to assist this Province little or no assist
ance had been given or can be hoped for through the re
moteness of some Governments and Excuses and delays of
others. That Pensilvania being most Quakers will give no men or
money for warr unless they were joined to the Government
of New York, by which that Province may be able to out
vote them.
That this Province lying under heavy Taxes and Pres
sures, most of the young men and those that can in any way
remove, depart this Province to the neighbouring Govern
ment where they are wholly free from Tax or any other
Contrybution towards the Common Security. — Ibid, p. S3.
A NEW STAGE  THE ALBANY CONGRESS  INSTRUC
TIONS TO COMMISSIONERS.
William Shirley, Esq. Captain General and Governor in
Chief in and over his Majesty's Province of Massachusetts
Bay in New England,
To Samuel Welles, John Chandler, Thomas Hutchinson,
Oliver Partridge, and John Worthington Esq'rs Greeting.
Whereas, in pursuance of letters from the right honorable
the Lords Commissioners for Trade and the Plantations,
, , , ft General Convention of Commissioners for their

40 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
respective Governments is appointed to be held at the city
of Albany in the month of June next [1754] for holding an
interview with the Indians of the Five Nations and making
them presents ou the part of said Governments usual upon
such occasions, in order to confirm and establish their an
cient attachment to his Majesty and their constant friendship
to his Majesty's subjects on this continent; and whereas
the Great and General Court or assembly of the Province
of Massachusetts Bay aforesaid, have elected and appointed
you to represent and appear for said Province at the Con
vention aforesaid for the purposes abovementioned ; as also
for entering into articles of Union and Confederation with
the aforesaid Governments for the general defence of his
Majesty's subjects and interests in North America, as well in
time of peace as of war : —
Now I do, by these presents, empower and commissionate
you, the said Samuel Wells, John Chandler, Thomas Hutch
inson, Oliver Partridge, and John Worthington, as Commis
sioners (or any three of you) to appear for and represent the
Province of Massachusetts Bay aforesaid.
Given under my hand and the public seal of the Province
of Massachusetts Bay aforesaid, the nineteenth day of April,
1754, in the twenty seventh year of his Majesty's reign.
W. Shirlet.
By his Excellency's command :
J. WiLLARD, Secretary.
A true copy. Attest: Samuel Weller
John Chandler.
Ol'r Partridge.
John Worthington.
Similar instructions were given to the com
missioners from the other provinces. — Massa
chusetts Historical Collections, vol. V, 3d series,
p. 9.
It was proposed by fiie Governor, that to avoid all dis
putes about the precedency of the colonies, they should be
named in the minutes according to their situation from north
to south ; which was agreed to. — Ibid, p. 26.
A motion was made that the Commissioners deliver their
opinion whether a Union of all the Colonies is not at pres
ent absolutely necessary to their security and defence. The
question was accordingly put, and it was decided in th9

tjaVBLOfMBNT off UNION AMONG COLONIES. 41
affirmative unanimously. Which proposal the Board
determined to proceed upon after they had considered some
method of effecting the Union between the Colonies. — Ibid.
pp. 27-28.
After debates held on the plan of a Union, it was moved
if the Board should proceed to form the plan of a Union of
the Colonies, [it ought] to be established by an Act of Par
liament. — Ibid, p. 39.
That the said Colonies being in a divided disunited, state,
there has never been any joint exertion of their force or
counsels to repel or defeat the measures of the French, and
particular Colonies are unable and unwilling to maintain the
cause of the whole. — Ibid, p. 67.
It is proposed that humble application be made for an
Act of parliament of Great Britain, by virtue of which one
general government may be formed in America, including
all the said colonies, within and under which government
each colony may retain its present constitution, except in
the particulars wherein a change may be directed by the said
Act, as hereinafter follows. . . •
That the said general government be administered by a
President-General, to be appointed and supported by the
Crown ; and a Grand Council, to be chosen by the repre
sentatives of the people of the several Colonies met in their
respective Assemblies.
That the House of Representatives [of each colony] may
and shall choose members for the Grand Council, in the fol
lowing proportion, that is to say,
Massachusetts  7 Maryland  4
New Hampshire  2 Virginia.  ^
Connecticut  5 North Carolina  4
Rhode Island  2 South Carolina  ^
New York  4
New Jersey  3
Pennsylvania  6
. . That there shall be a new election of members of
the Grand Council every three years.
That after the first three years, when the proportion of
money arising out of each colony to the general treasury can
be known, the number of members to be chosen for each
colony shall from time to time . . . , be regulated by
that proportion, yet so as that the number to be chosen by
any one province be not more than seven, nor less than two.
That the assent of the President-General be requisite to

42 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
all acts of the Grand'Council, and that it be his office and
duty to cause them to be carried into execution.
That they raise and pay soldiers and build forts for the
defence of any of the colonies, and equip vessels of force to
guard the coasts and protect the trade on the ocean, lakes
or great rivers ; but they shall not impress men in any col
ony, without the consent of the Legislature.
That for these purposes they have power to make laws,
and lay and levy such general duties, imposts or taxes, as tg
them shall appear most equal and just (considering the abil
ity and other circumstances of the inhabitants in the several
colonies), and such as may be collected with the least incon
venience to the people ; rather discouraging luxury, than
loading industry with unnecessary burdens.
That laws made by them for the purposes aforesaid
shall not be repugnant, but, as near as may be, agreeable to
the laws of England, and shall be transmitted to the King
in Council for approbation, as soon as may be after their
passing, and if not disapproved within three years after pre
sentation, to remain in force. .
And all civil officers are to be nominated by the Grand
Council, and to receive the President-General's approbation
before they officiate.— J6., pp. 70-73.
Franklin, in 1789, speaks of the results of the
rejection of the Albany plan of union of 1754
as follows:
On reflection, it now seems probable that, if the foregoing
plan, or something like it had been adopted and carried into
execution, the subsequent separation of the colonies from
the Mother-country might not so soon have happened, nor
the mischiefs suffered on both sides have occurred, perhaps,
during another century. For tbe colonies, if so united,
would have really been, as they then thought themselves,
sufficient to their own defence,^and being trusted with it,
as by the plan, an army from Britain for that purpose,
would have been unnecessary. The pretenses for framing
the Stamp Act would then not have existed, nor the other
projects for drawing a revenue from America to Britain by
acts of parliament, which were the cause of the breach, and
attended with such terrible expense of blood and treasure,
so that the different parts of the empire might still have re
mained in peace and union. But the fate of this plan was
singular.^ A.fter many days' thorough discussion of all its

DBVELOPMEffT OP UNION AMONG COLONIES. 43
[ aris, in Congress, it was unanimously agreed to, and copies
ordered to be sent to the assembly of each province for con
currence, and one to the ministry in England for approba
tion of the crown.
The crown disapproved it, as having too much weight in
the democratic part of the constitution, and every assembly
as having allowed too much to prerogative ; so it was totally
rejected. — Cited in Frothingham, p. 149.
Nothing can exceed the jealousy and emulation which
they possess in regard to each other. The inhabitants of
Pennsylvania and New York have an inexhaustible source of
animosity in their jealousy for the trade of the Jerseys.
Massachusetts Bay and Rhode Island are not less interested
in that of Connecticut were they left to themselves,
there would soon be a civil war from one end of the conti
nent to the other. — lb., p. 152.
The circular to the various colonies, prepared
by the legislature of Massachusetts, calling for
a congress of the colonics, dated July 8, 1765,
reads as follows:
Sir, — The House of Representatives of this province, in
the present session of General Court, have unanimously
agreed to propose a meeting of committees from
the houses of representatives or burgesses of the several
British colonies on this continent, [give reasons] and to con
sider of a general and united . . representation of
their condition. . . — Niles, Principles and Acts of
the American Revolution, p. 156.
In organizing the Congress Oct 7, 1765, it was decided
that the committee of each colony shall have one voice (vote)
only in determining any question that shall rise in the con
gress.— i6., 162.
Wednesday, Oct. 9th, 1765, a. m.— The congress
resumed the consideration of the rights and privileges of the
British American colonists, &o. . —lb. , 16:B.
Thursday, Oct. 24, 1765, A. M.— ... The Congress
took into consideration the manner in which their several
petitions should be preferred and solicited in Great Britain,
and thereupon came to the following determination, viz :
It is recommended by the Congress to the several colonies
to appoint special agents for soliciting relief from their pres
ent grievances, and to unite their utmost interests and en
deavors for that purpose. — lb., 168.

44 AMERICAN HISTOki STUDIES.
One stanza of a "song sung at Boston, in New
England," 1765, entitled "Advice from the
Country," is of interest in this connection:
With us of the woods
Lay aside your fine goods.
Contentment depends not on fine clothes
We hear, smell and see.
Taste and feel with high glee,
And in winter have huts for repose.
In 1766 an article appears signed "A British
American." — Frothingham, 194.
Sam. Adams, Sept. 16, 1771, writes in the
"Boston Gazette":
I have often thought that in this time of common distress,
it would be the wisdom of the colonists more frequently to
correspond with »»d to be more attentive to the particular
circumstances of each other. The colonists form
one political body of which each is a member. The
liberties of the whole are iifvaded ; it is therefore the inter
est of the whole to support ,each individual with all their
weight and inflaence. — Frothingham, p. 263.
In the House of Burgesses in Virginia, March, 1773.
And whereas the affairs of the colony are frequently con
nected with those of Great Britain, as well as the neighboring
colonies therefore Be it resolved, that a
standing committee of [11 including Patrick Henry and
Thomas Jefferson] be appointed . whose business it
shall be to obtain [information concerning acts of British
government] and to keep up and maintain a correspondence
. with her sister colonies. . Resolved, that
the speaker of this House do transmit to the speakers of the
different assemblies copies of the said resolutions . . .
and request them to appoint some person or persons .
to communicate from time to time with the said committee.
— Cited in Frothingham, pp. 280-81.
This is no time for ceremony. The question before the
House is one of awful moment to this country. For my
own part I consider it as nothing less than a question of
freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of
the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is
only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and
fulfil the great responsibility which we hold to God and our
counti7. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time.

DEVELOPMENT OP UMON AMONG COLONIES. 45
through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself
as guilty of treason toward my country . .
They tell us, sir, that we are weak ; unable to cope with
so formidable an adversary. Sir, we are not weak,
if we make a proper use of the means which the God of
nature-hath placed in our power. Three millions of people,
armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as
we possess, are invincible by any force which one enemy
can send against us.
Patrick Henry, March 28, 1775, in Virginia Convention.—
Cited in American Orations, p. 1S3.
questions.
1. Why were Mr. Coddington and Mr. Brereton not to be
communicated with by the governor of Massachusetts? 2.
What does it prove in regard to union ? 3. What colony
made the first movement toward confederation? 4. Name
the provinces in New England, 1640. 5. Who were magis
trates? • 6. Who were deputies? 7. Name reasons for
union in 1643. 8. Who was Bradford? 9. Who was Win
throp? 10. Did the colonies have the right to form the con
federation? 11. Do you find any evidences of jealousy
among the colonies ? 12. What were the terms of union ?
13. Were they just? 14. What qualification for being a
"commissioner"? 15. What provisions in our present con
stitution can you find in the confederacy of 1643 ? 16. Did
the English government approve of the confederacy? 17.
What claims did the colonists make in regard to the benefits
of the confederation? 18. Why did the English "commis
sions" dislike the use of the words state, commonwealth,
etc., by the colonists? 19. Were the English "commis
sions" and the colonists on good terms? Why? 20. Was
Jacob Leisler for union? 21. How did the Indian feel about
unity ? 22. What did Governor Treat mean by the "ancient
confederation"? 23. Under what name do you find Massa
chusetts sometimes spoken of? 24. Was Jacob Leisler an
educated man? 25. Name the various times when there
was a union more or less perfect. 26. Which were most
numerous in America, the English or the French? 27. Why
did the French get possession of so large a part of America,
about 1750? 28. ^^ame the reasons given by Gov. Living
ston. 29. What remedy was proposed for the weakness of
the English ? 80. Can you see that union was wished for
different purposes? 81. Why did the English wish to unite
the colonies? 82. Why did the colonies desire to form a
union? 33. Name the means the party of the "preroga
tive," the Engiish party, proposed to bring about unity.
84. Do you approve of Mr. Penn's plan of anion? 35.
Which the better, his, or that of Governor Livingston, 1701 ?
36. Name the various persons who proposed plans of union.
87. Who were the greatest among them ? 38. How did the
Board of Trade like conventions? 33. Why did Governor

46 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Fletcher ^ot expect any help Irom Pennsylvania? 40.
Trace the steps that led to the Albany congress. 41. Why
were the colonies named in order from north to south ? 42.
How are they ordinarily named now? 43. Who authorized
the union? 44. Name the points in the plan of Franklin
for a union, 1754. 45. Why were these articles of confed-
ation rejected by the colonies ? by England ? 46. Compare
this plan with that of 1643. 47. Which the better? 48.
Importance of the word American as used about 1766. 49.
Why did the colonies desire to unite about 1765 ? 50. Write
all you can on the significance of the phrase "A British-
American." 51. What were the committees of correspond
ence? 52. In what states was the idea of having them con
ceived? 53. How did Patrick Henry regard union? 54.
What kind of union was possible? 55. Write an essay trac
ing the growth of the idea of union. 56. How is the poetry
connected with the topic of union?

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

Volume II. will include the following numbers:
(1) Gallatin, i3) Adams, J. Q., (3) Clay, (4) Webster,
(5) Calhoun, (6) Sumner, (7) Douglas, (8/ Seward, (9)
Chase, (10) Blaine.
Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents. Ten or more
copies of one number, 4 cents each. Yearly subscrij -
tion, 40 cents. Ten or more subscriptions to one ad
dress, 30 cents each.

EUROPEAN HISTORY STUDIES.

Volume II. will include the following numbers:
(1) Christian and Pagan, (2) The Teutonic Barbari
ans, (3) Selections from the Koran, (4) Feudalism, (5)
Chivalry and the Mode of Warfare, (6) Monasticism,
(7) The Jews during the Middle Ages, (8i The Rise of
Cities, (9) Medieval Industries, (10) Medieval Science. ¦
Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents. Ten or more
copies of one number, 3 cents each. Yearly subscrip
tion, 40 cents. Ten or more subscriptions to one ad
dress, 30 cents each.
Volume I. , loose, 40 cents ; bound, 55 cents.

THE NORTH WESTERN MONTHLY.

The North Western Monthly is a magazine
devoted to University Extension and to the correlation
of all the educational forces of a community. It advo
cates the source method of teaching history, and con-^
tains each month studies from the Sources in American
History, and Sources in European History.
Other Departments- Studies in Economics, Out
side Educational Forces, Child Study, Studies in
English, etc.
Price $1.35 per year. Sample copy sent free.
Address J. H. Miller, Publisher,
Lincoln, Neb.

^^4^1^

American History Studies

No. .3

NOVEMBER, 1897.

CAUSES OF THE

AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOtlRCE-S

H. W. CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA.

AINSWORTH & COMPANY,
378-388 "Wabash Avenue, CHICAGO, ILL.

Yearly Subscription, 40 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION.
cM,T^ the last study we traced some of the move-
"% ments looking to a union of the colonies.
"¦ -An attempt was made to show that two
forces were at work, one tending to emphasize
the importance of the colony, and the other the
value and necessity _of union. In the causes ol
the American Revolution we shall find many
factors which intensified the spirit of union. In
fact, the necessity , of union in order to resist
the plans of the English king and ministry was
in itself a great educative force .in this move
ment. The right of local self-government was
perhaps the most fundamental issue. The colo
nies were accustomed to make their own laws,
and to live their own life, hence, when the acts
of the king and parliament in the years follow
ing 1760, seemed to endanger these privileges,
resistance appeared and increased till independ
ence was established.
It must be seen clearly, if we are to under
stand this movement at all, that a spirit existed
in America different from that in England. The
colonists already, as early as 1760, looked at all
social, political, and even religious questions
out of different eyes than their fellow citizens
on the other side of the water. This spirit was
the product of past forces in their colonial life.
In short, it must be noticed that a new people
was in process of formation. Hence, if any
question arose which necessitated the yielding
of one view or the other a conflict was sure to

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 49
occur. The literature of the period, 1760 to
1776, is very abundant, both in American and in
English publications. The debates in parlia
ment furnish the views of English statesmen.
The letters that were sent from the English
cabinet to governors and other officials in
America give us the spirit that animated the
English government of the time. The instruc
tions that were sent by the colonial assemblies
to their agents in England, the resolutions of
the Stamp Act Congress, and of the first and
second Continental Congresses, together with
the letters and writings of statesmen of the
time, preserve a very vivid picture of the views
of the Americans. It is felt that in the follow
ing extracts the views of Englaad and of the
"Tories" are not adequately set forth; the rea
son, the press of other duties which made the
time at my command unequal to the necessities
of the occasion.
For those who can invest a few dollars in the
very best body of sources which has yet ap
peared, I wish to speak of Prof. Hart's "Ameri
can History as Told by Contemporaries." The
first volume is out, and the second, which brings
the history down to 1783, is announced for this
month. There are to be four volumes, pub
lished by Macmillan & Co., at |2.00 per volume,
or 17.00 for the set.
The Acts of Navigation and of Trade of 1660,
1664, and 1672 should be noted as factors in the
formation of an American spirit hostile to Eng
lish conceptions.
Act of Navigation, 1660.
For the increase of shipping and encouragement of
the navigation of this nation be it enacted,
that . no goods or commodities, "Whatsopver,
sliall be imported into, or exported out of, any lands.
Islands to Ms Majesty belonging in
Asia, Africa or America, in any other ships or vessels
but In such ships or vessels, as do truly

50 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
belong to the people of England . or are of the
build of, and belonging to, any of the said islands . .
Section 18. And it is further enacted . that
from and after the first day of April, which shall be in
the year of our Lord 1661, no sugars, tobacco, cotton,
wool, indigoes, ginger, fusticks or other dyeing wood of
the growth of an English plantation In Amer
ica, Asia or Africa shall be shipped, carried . to
any land other than to such English planta
tions as do belong to his Majesty or to the
kingdom of England. . . . — Rot. Pari. IS C. II., p.
2 nu. 6. 5 Statutes of the Realm, 2.'/6'. Cited in Scott
Development of Constitutional Liberty, pp. SH-16.
Statute 15 Car. 11., c. 7— .4.. D. 1663.
Section fifth. And in regard [to] his Majesty's planta
tions beyond the seas ["which] are inhabited and
peopled by his subjects of this his kingdom of England,
for keeping them in a firmer dependence upon
it, and rendering them yet more beneficial and advan
tageous unto it, in the further . . increase of
"^nglish shipping and seamen, vent of English wool
aad other manufactures
Section sixth. Be it enacted etc., that no commodity
of the growth, production, or manufacture of Europe,
shall be imported into any land, island colony
or place to his Majesty belonging in
Asia, Africa, or America, but which shall be
bona fide, and without fraud, laden and shipped in Eng
land, . and in English-built shipping, etc. . .
— Cited in Scott, Appendix, pp. 316-17.
Stat. 25 Car. II., c. 7— A. D. 1672.
Section fifth. And whereas, by one Act passed in this
present Parliament, . it is permitted to ship,
carry, convey, and transport sugar, tobacco, cotton, wool,
indigo, ginger, fustick, and all other dyeing wood
from the place of their growth to any other of
your Majesty's plantations in those parts, and that
without paying of customs for the same, [act here
recites that this privilege has been abused by export
ing these articles to other countries, therefore] for the
prevention thereof . be it enacted that
if any ship or vessel which by law may trade in any of
your Majesty's plantations shall take on board
any of the aforesaid commodities, [a bond shall be

CAUSES OP AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 5|
given] to bring the eame to England and to
no other place [except, of course, to another colony.]
QUESTIONS.
1. In what ships must all trade with England be car
ried on? 2. Where must all sugar, etc., be sent to be
sold? 3. Why was the statute of 1763 pas»ed? 4. If
the colonies wished to buy any goods of Portugal,
where must they first take them? 5. For what object
did colonies exist? 6. What does 15 Car. II., c. 7
mean? 7. What effect did the law of 1672 have on
colonial trade in sugars, etc.?
The town of Boston, as early as May 24, 1764,
in instructions given to its delegates in the
General Assembly of Massachusetts, gives us
some indication of the spirit which was already
abroad in regard to colonial rights. These in
structions were drafted by Samuel Adams.
The whole series may be found in "American
Patriotism." Our trade has for a long time labored under great dis
couragements, and it is with the deepest concern that
we see such further difliculties coming upon us as will
reduce it to the lowest ebb, if not totally obstruct and
ruin it. .
There is now no room for further delay; we there
fore expect that you will use your earliest endeavors in
the General Assembly that such methods may be taken
as will 'effectually prevent these proceedings against
us. [We fear] that these unexpected proceedings may bs
preparatory to neiir taxations upon us; for if our trade
may be taxed, why not our lands? . This we
apprehend annihilates our charter right to govern and
tax ourselves. It strikes at our British privileges,
which, as we have never forfeited them, we hold in
common with our fellow subjects who are natives of
Britain. If taxes are laid upon us in any shape with
out our having a legal representation where they are
laid, are we not reduced from the character of free sub
jects to the miserable state of tributary slaves ?—-Amer-
ican Patriotism, p. 2 f.
Oct'jber 19, 1765, the Convention of Dele
gates from nine of the colonies — the Stamp Act

52 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Congress — formulates the principles of the
American people in these words:
The members of this Congress, sincerely devoted,
with the warmest sentiments of affection and duty, to
his Majesty's person and government, inviolably at
tached lo the present happy establishment of the Pro
testant succession; . having considered as ma
turely as time will permit, the circumstances of the
said colonies, esteem it our indispensable duty to make
the • following declarations of our humble opinion
respecting tbe most essential rights and liberties of
the colonists and of the grievances under which they
labor by reason of the several late acts of Parliament:
1. That his Majesty's subjects, in these colonies, owe
the same allegiance to the crown of Groat Britain, that
is owing from his subjects born within the realm; and
all due subordination to that august body, the Parlia
ment of Great Britain.
2. That his Majesty's liege subjects, in these colonies,
are entitled to all the inherent rights and liberties of
his natural-born subjects within the kingdom of Great
Britain. 3. That It is inseparably essential to the freedom of
a people, and the undoubted right of Englishmen, that
no taxes be Imposed on them but with their own coa-
sent, given personally, or by their representatives.
4. That the people of these colonies are not, and from
their local circumstances cannot be, represented in the
House of Commons in Great Britain.
5. That the only representatives of the people of
these colonies, are persons chosen therein by them
selves; and that no taxes ever have been, or can be
constitutionally imposed on them, but by their respec
tive legislatures.
6. That all supplies to the crown being the free gifts
of the people, it is unreasonable and inconsistent with
the principles and spirit of the British constitution, for
the people of Great Britain to grant to his Majesty, the
property of the colonists.
8. That the late act of Parliament entitled, "An act
for granting and applying certain stamp duties, and
other duties in the British colonies and plantations in
America, etc.," by imposing taxes on the inhabitants
of these colonies, and the said act, and several other

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 53
acts, by extending the jurisdiction of the courts of
admiralty beyond its ancient limits, have a manifest
tendency to subvert the rights and liberties of the
colonists. . . . — Niles' "Principles and Acta of the
Revolution," under New York.
The Resolves of the House of Burgesses of
Virginia, passed May 16, 1769, may also be cited
to show the constitutional doctrines set forth
some four years afterwards by that colony,
which later, when a state, became known as
the Mother of Presidents.
Resolved, Nemine contradicente, That the sole right of
Imposing taxes on the inhabitants of this, his Majesty's
colony and Dominion of Virginia, is now, and hath
been, legally and constitutionally vested in the House
of Burgesses, lawfully convened, according to the
encient and established practice, with the consent of
the council, and of his Majesty, the King of Great
Britain, or his Governor for the time being.
Resolved, Nemine contradicente. That it is the un
doubted privilege of the inhabitants of this colony to
pe.ition their Sovereign for redress of grievances; and
that it is lawful . to procure the concurrence of
His Majesty's other colonies, praying the
royal interposition in favor of the violated rights of
America. v
Resolved, Nemine contradicente. That all trials for
treason, or for any felony or crime whatso
ever, committed in said colony ought
of right to be had, and conducted in and before His
Majesty's courts, held within his said colony, . ;
and that the seizing and sending such person
. - beyond the sea to be tried, is highly derogatory
of the rights of British subjects, . — Cited in Ohan-
ning, The United States of Ameripa, p. 300.
Patrick Henry formulates their doctrines in
these stirring sentences, May 29, 1765 :
Whereas, The Honorable House of Commons, in
England, have of late drawn into question how far
the General Assembly of this colony hath power to
enact laws for laying of taxes . . ; for settling and as
certaining the same to all future times, the House of

54 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Burgesses of this present General Assembly have come
to the following resolves: —
Resolved. That the first . settlers of . .
Virginia, brought with them and transmitted to their
posterity, all the privileges and immunities
that have at any time been held, enjoyed, and possessed
by the people of Great Britain.
Resolved, That his Majesty's liege people of this his
ancient colony have enjoyed the right of being thus
governed by their own Assembly in the article of taxes
and internal police; [tbe same never yielded up; also
the same recognized by king and people of Great
Britain.] Jicsulvtd. Therefore, that the General Assembly of
this colony, together with his Majesty or his substi
tutes, have in their representative capacity, the only
exclusive right and power to lay taxes and imposts
upon the people of this colony; and that every attempt
to vest such power in any other person or personsi
whatsoever than the General Assembly aforesaid, is
illegal, unconstitutional, and unjust, and has a mani
fest tendency to destroy British as well as. American
liberty. Resolced, That . tbe inhabitants of this colony,
are not bound to yield obedience to any law
designed to impose any taxation whatsoever upon
them, other than the laws . of the General
Assembly. Rcsoli-ed, That any person who shall . . assert
that any person, other than the Gen
eral Assembly have any right or power to
lay any taxation on the people here, shall be
deemed an enemy to his Majesty's colony. — Cited in
Channing, pp. 51-52.
Examination of Dr. Franklin before the Eng
lish House of Commons, in February, 1766, rela
tive to the repeal of the American Stamp Act:
Q. What is your name, and place of abode?
A. Franklin, of Philadelphia.
Q. Do the Americans pay any considerable taxes
among themselves?
A. Certainly many, and very heavy taxes.
Q. Are not the colonies, from their circumstances,
very able to pay the stamp duty?

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 55
A. In my opinion there is not gold or silver enough
in the colonies to pay the stamp duty for one year.
Q. Do not you think the people of America would
submit to pay the stamp duty, if it was moderated?
A. No, never, unless compelled by force of arms.
Q. What was the temper of America towards Great
Britain before the year 1763?
A. The best in the world. They submitted willingly
to the government of the crown, and paid, in their
courts, obedience to acts of parliament. . Na
tives of Britain were always treated with a particular
regard; to be an Old England-man was, of itself, a
character of some -respect, and gave a kind of rank
among us.
Q. And what is their temper now?
A. O, very much altered.
Q. Did you ever hear the authority of parliament to
make laws for America questioned till lately?
A. The authority of parliament was allowed to be
valid in all laws, except such as should lay internal
taxes. It was never disputed in laying duties to reg
ulate commerce.
Q. And have they not still the same respect for par-
Jament? A. No, it is greatly lessened.
Q. To what cause is that owing?
A. To a concurrence of causes: the restraints lately
laid on their trade, . the prohibition of their
making paper-money among themselves, and then de
manding a new and heavy tax by stamps, taking away,
at the same time trials by juries, and refusing to receive
and hear their humble petitions.
Q. Was it an opinion in America before 1763, that the
parliament had no right to lay taxes and duties there?
A. I never heard any objection to the right of laying
duties to regulate commerce, but a right to lay internal
taxes was never supposed to be in parliament, as we
are not represented there.
Q. Suppose an act of internal regulations connected
with a. tax, how would they receive it?

56 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
A. I think it would be objected to.
Q. Then no regulation with a tax would be submitted
to? A. Their opinion Is, that when aids to the crown are
wanted, they are to be asked of the various assemblies,
according to the old established usage; who will, as
they always have done, grant them freely. And that
their money ought not to be given away, without their
consent, by persons at a distance, unacquainted with
their circumstances and abilities. The granting aids
to the crown is the only means they have of recom
mending themselves to their sovereign; and they think
it extremely hard and unjust, that a body of men, in
which they have no representatives, should make a
merit to itself of giving and granting what is not its
own, but theirs; and deprive them of a right they
esteem of the utmost value and importance, as it is the
security of all their other rights.
Q. Are they (the colonists) acquainted with the
declaration of rights? And do they know that, by that
statute, money is not to be raised on the subject but by
consent of parliament?
A. They are very well acquainted with it.
Q. How then can they think they have a right to levy
money for the crown? .
A. They understand that clause to relate to subjects
only within the realm; that no money can be levied on
them (i. e. those within the realm) for the crown, but
by consent of parliament. The colonies are not sup
posed to be within the realm; they have assemblies of
their own, which are their parliaments, and they are,
in that respect, in the same situation as Ireland.
They think the parliament of Great Britain can not
properly give that consent, till it has representatives
from America; for the petition of right expressly says,
it is to be by common consent in parliament; and the
people of America have no representatives in parlia
ment to make a part of that common consent.
A. They find in the great charters, and the petition
and declaration of rights, that one of the privileges of
English subjects is, that they are not to be taxed but
by their common consent; they have therefore relied
upon it, . . . that parliament never would, nor

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 57
could, . . , assume a right of taxing them. Ml it
had qualified Itself to exercise such a right, by admit
ting representatives from the people to be taxed, who
ought to make a part of the common consent,
Q. What used to be the pride of the Americans?
A. To indulge in the fashions and manufactures of
Great Britain.
Q. What is now their pride?
A. To wear their old clothes over again, till they can
make new ones. — Franklin, Works, IV, p. 709 f.
Perhaps there is no document that gives us
a deeper and keener insight into the thought of
the times than Franklin's "Causes of American
Discontent," written in 1768. The following
quotations will indicate the scope of his argu
ments. It will be noticed that he writes as an
Englishman. From the time that the colonies were first considered
as capable of granting aids to the crown, it is
said that the constant mode was by requisi
tions made from the crown, . . to the several
asemblies. Had this happy method been continued
there is no doubt but all the money that could reason
ably be expected to be raised from them in any manner
might have been obtained without the least
breach of the harmony of affections between
the two countries.
[They believed that] whatever money was to be
raised from the people in the colonies must first be
granted by their assemblies, as the money to be raised
in Britain is first to be granted by the House of Com
mons; .
[Another act was passed] to oblige the several
Assemblies te provide quarters for the soldiers, fur
nishing them "With fireing (fuel), bedding, candles,
small beer or rum, etc.
[Later, 1767, another person, Townshend) projected
the levying more money from America, by new duties
on various articles of our own manufacture, as glass,
paper, etc., which were for the pay
ment of salaries of governors, judges and other officers

58 AMKKICA.N HISTORY STUDIES.
of the crown in America, it being a pretty general opin
ion here that those officers ought not to depend on the
people there for any part of their support.
They say there [in America] as to governors . .
that they are generally strangers to the provinces they
are sent to govern. They have no estate or
natural relation there to give them an affection for the
country; that they come only to make money as fast as
they can; are sometimes men of vicious character
As to judges, they allege that, being appointed from thia
country, and holding their commissions not during
good behavior, as in Britain, but during pleasure, all
the weight of interest or influence would be thrown into
one of the scales. . if the salaries are also to be
paid out of duties raised upon the people without their
consent, . .
They reflected how lightly the interests of all Amer
ica had been estimated here, when the interests of a few
of the inhabitants of Great Britain happened to have
the smallest competition with it. . The hatters
of England have prevailed to obtain an act in their own
favor, restraining that manufacture in America.
In the same manner have a few nail-makers, and a
still smaller body of steel-makers . prevailed
totally to forbid by an act of Parliament the erecting
of slitting mills, or steel furnaces, in America. — Frank
lin's Works; also in "American Patriotism."
Stephen Hopkins, of Providence, Rhode Isl
and, sets forth the grievances of the colonies in
a very elaborate paper. From it a few extracts
are made, which bring out some points not
found in the other documents cited:
. , Whether the colonies will ever be admitted
to have representatives in Parliament-;-whether it be
consistent with their distant and dependent state;
whether, if it were admitted, it would be to their
advantage — are questions we will pass by. . .
The colonies are at so great a distance from Eng
land that the members of Parliament can generally
have but little knowledge of their business . . , and
interests. For what good reason can possibly be given for mak
ing a law to cramp the trade and Interests of many of

CAUSES OP AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 59
the colonies, and at the same time lessen . the
consumption of the British manufactures in them?
The duty of three pence per gallon on foreign molasses
must operate as an absolute prohibition. This
will put a total stop to the exportation of lumber,
horses, flour and fish to the French and Dutch sugar-
colonies. Putting an end to the importation of
foreign molasses puts an end to all the costly
distilleries in these colonies and to the rum trade with
the coast of Africa, and throws it into the hands of the
French. .
By the same act of parliament the exportation of all
kinds of timber and lumber, the most natural products
of these colonies is greatly encumbered.
Enlarging the power and jurisdiction of the courts of
vice-admiralty in the colonies, is another part of the
same act greatly and justly complained of. Courts of
admiralty have long been there in most of the colonies
whose authority were circumscribed within moderate
territorial jurisdiction. . .
But now this case is quite altered, and a custom
house ofiicer may make a seizure in Georgia of goods
ever so legally imported, and carry the trial to Halifax,
. and thither the owner must follow him to de
fend his property; .
We are not insensible that when liberty is in danger
the liberty of complaining is dangerous; yet a man on
a wreck was never denied the liberty of roaring as
loud as he could, says Dean Swift. And we believe no
good reason can be given why the colonies should
not modestly and soberly inquire, what right the Par
liament of Great Britain have to tax them.— Cited in
American Patriotism, p. 4 f.
THE LETTERS FROM A FARMER.
Among the most famous writings of the time,
as well as the most influential, were the Letters
of a Farmer. These letters were written by John
Dickinson, a lawyer of Pennsylvania, in 1768.
The sentiment of the man, and the arguments
of the time are indicated in the following ex
tracts, taken from different parts of the twelve
letters which he wrote and published in the
newspapers of the day:

60 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
With a good deal of surprise I have observed, that
little notice has been taken of an act of parliament, as
injurious in its principle to the liberties of these col
onies, as the Stamp-Act was; I mean the act for sus
pending the legislature of New York. . . . If the
British parliament has a legal authority to issue an
order, that we shall furnish a single artiiie for the
troops here, and to compel obedience to that order, they
have the same right to issue an order for us to supply
those troops with arms, cloths, and to compel obedi
ence to that order also; in short to lay any burdens
they please upon us. What is this but taxing us at a
certain sum, and leaving to us only the manner of
raising it? How is this made more tolerable than the
Stamp- Act?
"It is my opinion [quoted from Wm. Pitt] that this
kingdom has no right to lay a tax upon the colonies."
"The Americans are the sons, not the bastards
of England." "Taxation is no part of tne governing
and legislative power." . The taxes are a vol
untary gift and grant of the commons alone. In
Legislation the three estates of the realm are alike con
cerned, but the concurrence of the peers and the crown
to a tax is only necessary to close with the form of law.
The gift and grant is of the commons alone."
"The distinction between legislation and taxation is
necessary to liberty." The commons of Amer
ica represented in the assemblies have ever been in
possession of the exercise of this their constitutional
right, of giving and granting their own money. "They
would have been slaves if they had not enjoyed it."
The idea of a virtual representation of America in
this house, is the most contemptible Idea that ever
entered the head of man, — it does not deserve a serious
refutation. . . .
For Who Are a Free People? Not those, over whom
government is reasonably and equitably exercised, but
those who live under a government so constitutionally
checked and controlled, that proper provision is made
against its being otherwise exercised. The late act is
founded -on the destruction of this constitutional
sec'irity. If the parliament have a right tOi lay a duly
of Four Shillings and Eight pence on a hundred weight
of glass, or a ream of paper, they have a. right to lay

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 61
a duty of any other sum on either. . ; If they
Have a right to lay a tax of one penny upon us, they
have a right to levy a million, for where does their
right stop? At any given number of Pence Shillings
or Pounds? To attempt to limit their right, after
granting it to exist at all, is as contrary to reason — as
granting it at all is contrary to justice. . . If they
have any right to tax us — then whether our own money,
shall continue in our own pockets or not, depends no
longer on us, but on them, . There is nothing
which we can call our own. or to use the words of Mr.
Locke — "What property have we in that, which an
other may, by right, take when he pleases, to himself?"
These duties, which will inevitably be levied upon us —
which are now upon us — are expressly laid for the sole
purpose of taking money. This is the true definition of
"taxes." They are therefore taxes. This money is to
be taken from us. We are therefore taxed. Those who
are taxed without their own consent expressed by them-
«elves or their representatives are slaves.
We are taxed without our own consent, expressed by
ourselves or our representatives. We are therefore
Slaves.
• ••••••
The three most important articles that our assem
blies, or any legislature can provide for, are First — the
defence of the society; Secondly — the administration
of justice; Thirdly — the support of civil government.
Nothing can properly regulate the expense of making
provisions for these occasions, but the necessities of
society; its abilities; the conveniency of the modes
of levying money in the manner in which the laws
have been executed; and the conduct of the officers
of governments. All which are circumstances, that
cannot possibly be properly known, but by society
Itself; or if they should be known, will not probably
be properly considered but by that society. . , .
"We have all the rights requisite for our prosperity."
The legal authority of Great Britain may indeed lay
hard restrictions upon us; but like the spear of Tele-
phus, it will cure as well as wound. Her unkindness
will instruct and compel us, to discover, in our industry
or frugality, surprising remedies— if our rights continue
an violated; for as long as the products of our labor.

62 A.MERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
and the rewards of our care, can properly be called our
own, so long it wiil be woivu our wiiile to be industrious
and frugal. But if when we plow — sew — re-dp — gather —
and thresh— we find that we— plow — sow — reap — gather
— and thresh for others, whose Pleasure is to be the
Bole Limitation how much they shall take, and how
much they shall leave, why should we repeat the un
profitable toll? "Horses and oxen are content with that
portion of the fruits of their work, which their owners
assign them, in order to keep them strong enough to
raise successive crops; but even these beasts will not
submit to draw for their masters, until thyy are subdued
by whips and goads."
"If I am an Enthusiast, in anything; It is in my zeal
for the perpetual dependence of these colonies on their
mother country — a dependence founded on mutual
benefits, the continuance of which can be secured only
by mutual affections."
For my part I regard Great Britain as a Bulwark,
happily fixed between these colonies and the powerful
nations of Europe. It is therefore our duty, and our
interest, to support the strength of Great Britain. — Life
and Writings of J. Dickinson, pp. 308-403.
Lord Mansfield made a reply to Pitt (Chat
ham) in regard to the right of the English Par
liament to tax the colonies. Something of an
idea of his arguments may be seen in the follow
ing extracts:
I am extremely sorry that the question has ever be
come necessary to be agitated, and that there should
be a decision upon it. No one in this house will live
long enough to see an end put to the mischief which
will be the result of the doctrine which has been incul
cated; but the arrow is shot, and the wound already
given. ,
There can be no doubt, my Lords, but that the
Inhabitants of the colonies are as much represented in
Parliament, as the greatest part of the people in Eng
land are represented; among nine millions of whom
there are eight which have no votes in electing mem-
bers of parliament. Every objection therefore to the
dependency of the colonies upon Parliament which
arises to it upon the ground of representation goes to

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 63
the whole present constitution of Great Britain: and
1 suppose it is not meant to new model that too,
A member of Parliament, chosen for any borough,
represents not only the constituents and inhabitants of
that particular place, but he represents the inhabitants
of every other borough in Great-Britain. He repre':dnts
the city of London and all the other commons of this
land, and the inhabitants of all the colonies and domin
ions of Great-Britain; and is in duty and conscience,
bound to take care of their interests.
I am far from bearing any ill wiil to the Americans;
they are a very good people, and I have long known
them, I began life with them, and owe much to them,
having been much concerned in the plantation causes
before the privy council; and, so I become a good deal
acquainted with American affairs and people. I dare
say their heat will soon be over, when they come to
feel a little the consequences of their opposition to
the Legislature. Anarchy always cures itself; but the
ferment will continue so much the longer, while hot
headed men there, find that there are persons of weight
and character to support and justify them here. . . .
"You may abdicate your right over the colonies.
Take care my Lords, how you do so, for such an act
will be irrevocable. Proceed, then, my Lords, with
spirit and firmness, and when you shall have estab
lished your authority, it will then be time to show your
lenity. The Americans, as I said before, are a very good
people, and I wish them exceedingly well; but they
are heated and inflamed. The noble Lord who spoke'
before ended with a prayer. I can not end better than
by saying to it. Amen; and in the words of Maurice,
prince of Orange, concerning the Hollanders, "God
bless this industrious, frugal, and well-meaning, but
easily deluded people," — Goodrich, British Eloquence, p.
USf. The following arguments are taken from the
protest that was entered in the Lords' journal
by some of the members of that house against
the proposed repeal of the Stamp Act:
This house has most solemnly asserted and declared,
first, — 'That the King's majesty, by and with the advise

64 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
and consent of the Lords spiritual and temporal, and
commons of Great Britain, in Parliament assembled,
had, hath, and of right ought to have, full power and
authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force
and validity to bind the colonies and people of Amer
ica, subject to the crown of Gt. Britain in all cases,
whatsoever." Secondly, "That tumults and insurrections
of the most dangerous nature have been raised and car
ried on in several of tne North-American colonies, in
open defiance of the power and dignity of his Majesty's
Government, and in manifest violation of the laws and
legislative authority of this Kingdom.' Thirdly, 'That
the said tumults and insurrections have been en
couraged and inflamed, by sundry votes and resolutions
passed in several of the assemblies of the said prov
inces, derogatory to the honour of his Majesty's Gov
ernment, and destructive of the legal and constitu
tional dependency of said colonies, on the Imp-erial
Crown and Parliament of Great-Britain."
"2-dly, Because the laws, which this bill now proposes
to repeal, was passed in the other house with very little
opposition and in this without one dissentient voice,
during the last session of Parliament, which we pre
sume, if it had been wholly, and fundamentally wrong,
could not possibly have happened;'"
4thly, Because it appears to us, that a most essential
branch of that authority, the power of taxation, cannot
be properly, equitably, or impartially exercised, if it
does not extend itself to all the Members of the State,
in proportion to their respective abilities, but suffers
a part to be exempt from a due share of those burdens
which the public exigencies require to be imposed upon
the whole; a partiality, which is directly repugnant to
the trust reposed by the people in every legislature,
and destructive of that confidence on which all Govern
ment is founded.
6thly, Because not only the right but the expediency
and necessity of the supreme Legislature's exerting its
authority to lay a general tax on our American colonies,
whenever the wants of the public make it fitting and
reasonable that all the provinces should contribute. In
B proper proportion, to the defence of the whole, appear
to us undeniable. . . .

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 65
7thly, Because the reasons assigned in the public
resolutions of the provincial Assemblies, in the North
American colonies, for their disobeying the Stamp-
Act, viz., "That they are not represented in the parlia
ment of Gt. -Britain,'" extends to all other laws of what
nature soever, which that Parliament has enacted, or
shall enact, to bind them in times to come, and must
(if admitted) let them absolutely free from any obedi
ence to the power of the British Legislature.
8thly, Because the appearance of weakness and
timidity in the Government and Parliament of this
kingdom, which a concession of this nature may too
probably carry with it, has a manifest tendency to draw
on farther insults, and, by lessening the respect of his
Majesty's subjects to the dignity of his crown, and
authority of his laws, throw the whole British empire
into a miserable state of confusion and anarchy, with
which it seems, by many symptoms, to be dangerously
threatened. — Parliamentary Debates, 1761-1768, p. 368 f.
From the Declaration of Rights of the Conti
nental Congress at Philadelphia, in 1774 :
"Whereupon the deputies so appointed being now
assembled, in a full and free representation of these
colonies, taking into their most serious consideration,
the best means of attaining the ends aforesaid, do, in
the first place, as Englishmen, their ancestors, in like
cases have usually done, for effecting and vindicating
their rights and liberties. Declare, —
That the inhabitants of the English colonies in North
America, by the immutable laws of nature, the princi
ples of the English constitution, and the several char
ters or compacts, have the following Rights: —
Resolved, n. c. d. 1. That they are entitled to life,
liberty, and property, and that they have never ceded
to any sovereign power whatever, a right to dispose of
either without their consent.
Resolved, n. c. d. 2. That our ancestors, who first set
tled these colonies, were at the time of their emigration
from the mother country, entitled to all the rights,
liberties, and immunities, of full and natural-born sub
jects, within the realm of England.
Resolved, u". c. d. 3. That by such emigration, they by
no means forfeited, surrendered, or lost any of those
rights, but that they were, and their descendants now

66 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
are entitled to the exercise and enjoyment of all such
of them, as their local and other circumstances enable
them to exercise and enjoy.
Resolved, i. That the foundation of English liberty,
and of all free government, is a right in the people to
participate in their legislative council; and as the
English colonists are not represented, and from their
local and other circumstances, cannot properly be, in
the British Parliament, they are entitled to a free and
exclusive power of legislation in their several provincial
legislatures, where their right of representation can
alone be preserved, in all cases of taxation and internal
polity, subject only to the negative of their sovereign,
in such manner as has been heretofore used and accus
tomed. — Preston, Documents Illustrative of American His
tory. The hiring of the Hessians and other German
troops brought on a long debate in the Com
mons, from which the following extracts are
made: Mk. Pox: I have alv.fays said that the war carried
on against the Americans is unjust, that It is not prac
ticable. I say, that the means made use of are by
no means such as will obtain the end. I shall conflne
myself singly to this ground, and shew this bill, like
every other measure, proves the want of policy, the
folly and madness of the present set of ministers. I
was in great hopes, that they had seen their error, and
had given over their endeavor to coerce, and to carry
on war against America, by means of Acts of Parlia
ment, In order to induce Americans to submit to your
legislature, you pass laws against them, cruel and
tyrannical in the extreme. If they complain of one
law, your answer to their complaint Is to pass another
more rigorous and severe than the former; but they
are in rebellion, you say; if they are, treat them as
rebels are wont to be treated.
I have ever understood it as a first principle, that in
rebellion you punish the individuals, but spare the
country; in a war against the enemy, you spare indi
viduals, and lay waste the country.
This last has been invariably your conduct against
America. I suggested this to you when the Boston
port bin passed. I advised you to find out the offend-

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 67
lag persons and to punish them; but what did you do
instead of this? You laid the whole town of Boston
under terrible contribution, punishing the innocent with
the guilty. You answer, that you could not come at the
guilty. This very answer shews how unfit, and ho-w
unable you are, to govern America.
Mk. Dempster said, he was sorry to see such a dis
position in administration to stifle and squash all
enquiry. He then turned, and took a short view
of the Quebec bill, and concluded, by solemnly averring,
that in his opinion, no Turkish emperor ever sent a
more arbitrary and oppressive mandate, by a favorite
bashaw, to a distant province, than that bill was with
the instructions to the governor, which accompanied it.
Mb. D. Habtley: In the course of our debates upon
American measures, I frequently hear the terms of
rebellion and rebels made use of. which I shall never
adopt; not only because I would avoid every term of
acrimony which might increase the ill-blood between
us and our fellow-subjects in America, but likewise
thinking as I do, that the ministry of this country have
been in every stage the aggressors: I never will, as a
Whig of revolutionary principles, confound terms so
fundamentally the reverse to each other, as defensive
resistance in the support of constitutional rights, with
unprovoked and active treason. The colonies have been
condemned unheard. I wish to enter my protest once
for all, that I shall always think that our American
fellow-subjects have been driven to resistance in their
own defence, and in support of those very claims which
we ourselves have successfully taken up arms in former
times, to secure us from the violence and tyrannical
pretensions of the House of Stuart These rights are
the giving and granting freely our own property, and
the security of charters.
HoNOEABLE James Letteell: The Americans have
never sought nor desire to be independent of Eng
land, They thought ministry misinformed, therefore
they requested to be heard, and however artfully they
may have been deprived of that privilege before this
House, I do respect it as the grand judicial Inquest
of the nation, which must be too high to
condemn an individual without a hearing, much less

68 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
three millions of subjects. Yet "tis said that Parlifc'
ment declared this war against America; let who will
have done it, I have seen enough of that country to
think it my duty to endeavor to express, how much
I am adverse to so iniquitious, so impolitic a persecu
tion. . Sir, I comprehend that ministry new
apply to Parliament for seventeen thousand Germans
to send to America, Good God, for what end? To en
slave a hundred and fifty thousand of their own coun
trymen, many of whom fled from tyrants to seek our
protection. Mr. Alderman Bull: I cannot. Sir, . . forbear
to express my asonishment that so
many gentlemen should have been prevailed upon
to approve and sanctify those cruel and arbitrary meas
ures by an unfeeling, an unrelenting admin
istration, who have dared to abuse the throne by their
wicked and sanguinary councils, and whose whole con
duct has proved them entirely destitute of every prin
ciple of justice, humanity, and the religion' of their
country. Sir, is -it certain, is it probable that
the exertions of ministerial tyranny and revenge will
be much longer permitted? Or can it be ex
pected that the people of this country, reduced by
thousands to beggary and want, will remain idle spec
tators till the sword is at their breasts, or dragoons at
their doors?
The war which you are now waging is an unjust one,
!t is founded in oppression, and its end will be distress
and disgrace. . I shall not now trouble the
House further, than to declare my abhorrence of all the
measures ^vhich have been adopted against America;
measures equally inimical to the principles of com
merce, to the spirit of the constitution, and to the
honor, to the faith, and the true dignity of the British
m-tion.— Parliamentary Debates, 1775-76, pp. 20-100.
QUESTIONS.
1. In what ways were the Navigation acts connected
with the American Revolution? 2. What industries
were encouraged in America? 3. What ones discour
aged? 4. Why do the people of Boston say their trade
has been bad for a long time, in 1764? 5. What reasons
are given in 1764 against taxation by British parlia
ment? 6. What reasons assigned for opposing?
7. Would they have been willing to be taxed, if they
had had representatives in Parliament? 8. What were

CAUSES OF AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 69
courts of Admiralty? 9. How were their powers ex
tended? 10. Were there any new reasons given in 1765
that you do not find in 1764? 11, Why do, the Vir
ginians in 1769 speak of right of petition? ' 12. What
new reasons of discontent mentioned in 1769? 13. Com
pare arguments of , P. Henry with those of S. Adams.
14. Why does Franklin object to the Stamp Act?
15. How did the Americans feel towards the English
as set forth by Franklin? 16. Did he distinguish be
tween Internal and external taxation? 17. Did the
colonies in later years, 17687'76? 18. What privileges
did he claim for the colonies? 19. "What foundation for
these claims ? 20. What f dree in the arguments of Mr.
Pownall? 21. Would we reason now much in the same
way? 22. Is Franklin's answer satisfactory? 23. Sum
marize the arguments of Franklin in Causes of Amer
ican Discontent. 24. How does Stephen Hopkins" argu
ment differ from the others? 25. What new points
(Joes he suggest? 26. Are the Farmer's letters convinc
ing? 27. Is it true that any authority which may be
abused, ought' not' to be granted? ;,?8. What are the
arguments of Mansfield in regard to right of Parlia
ment to tax? 29. Does present doctrine follow his view
or that of Dickinson and Chatham? 30. Were all the
American arguments based on idea of nationality or
state sovereignty? 31. How did the colonists regard
the English Constitution, as written or unwritten?
32. How did they differ in reg'ard to meaning of repre
sentation? 33. Did the Lords' protest set forth any
good grounds for their position? 34. Compare ideas
of Stamp Act Congress with ideas and arguments of
Congress of 1774. 35. What points does John Rutledge
emphasize? 36. Why were not the colonies virtually
represented, when they had such friends in. Parliament
as are cited from Parliamentary Debates? 37. "SVas
there danger of over-taxation with such men there?
38.' Would not agitation alone in time have secured
redress? 39. How far was .the war caused by improper
men in English cabinet? 40. Judged by the Declara
tion of 'independence, who caused the war? 41. Can
you find proof that all the charges contained in th«
Declaration of Independence were "well founded?

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

Volume II. "will include the following numbers:
(1) Gallatin, (2) Adams, J. Q., (3) Clay, (4) Web
ster, (5) Calhoun, (6) Sumner, (7) Douglas, (8) Se-\v-
ard, (9) Chase, (10) Blaine.
Jionthly. Price, .single copy, 5 cents. Ten or more
copies of one number, 4 cents each. Yearly subscrip
tion, 40 cents. Ten or more subscriptions to one ad
dress, 30 cents each.

EUROPEAN HISTORY STUDIES.

Volume II. will include the following numbers:
(1) Christian and Pagan, (2) The Teutonic Barbari
ans, (3) Selections from the Koran, (4) Feudalism,
(5) Chivalry and the Mode of Warfare, (fi) Monasti
cism, (7) The .Jews during the Middle Ages, (8) The
Else of Cities, (9) Medieval Industries, (10) Medieval
Science. Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents. Ten or more
copies of one number, 3 cents each. Yearly subscrip
tion, 40 cents. Ten or more subscriptions to one ad
dress, 30 cents each.
Volume I., loose, 40 cents; bound, 55 cents.

American History Studies

No. 4.

DECEMBER, 1897.

STEPS IN THE FORMATION
OF THE
United States Constitution.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA.

Yearly Subscription, 25 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

AINSWORTH & COMPANY
378-388 Wabash Ave.
CHICAGO 1903

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

STEPS IN THE FORMATION OF THE
UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
(T^ N the first place it must be noticed that our
"^ constitution is a growth and not a creation
of any one moment in our history. Its
elements may be traced back to the days when
our Teutonic ancestors were yet in the swamps
and forests of Germany. On American soil sev
eral stages in its growth may be marked. In
the New England confederacy, in the Albany
plan of union of 1754, in the various plans pro
posed about 1774 and 1775, in the Articles of
Confederation of 1781, we see successive move
ments, all essential parts of the ultimate resnlt
obtained in the convention of 1787. Along
another line of development we may also trace
the growth of the forces which became factors
in this result. The charters granted by the
crown to Virginia, to Massachusetts, to Rhode
Island, to Connecticut, and to other colonies,
the charters granted by the proprietors to Mary
land, to Pennsylvania, etc., furnished many
elements for the final structure. The principles
of the common law, and the English constitu
tion itself directly, were not without great in
fluence. Anything like a complete study, there
fore, of the genesis of our constitution would
necessitate an elaborate collection of the ma
terial contained in the foregoing suggestions.
Our aim will be rather to trace the causes which
were the immediate occasion for the constitu
tional convention, and to note the more impor-

FORMATION OP CSNSTITUTION. 73
tant steps in the years which Mr. Fiske has so
well called "The Critical Period." Also in
studying the formation of the constitution it
must ever be kept in mind that there were still
in existence the two forces we have noticed at
work in the colonial period, the one tending to
union, and the other to localism. They oper
ated at this time both as factors in determining
whether there should be a new constitution at
all, and also in influencing the nature of the
anion that should be formed. The question of
the location of sovereignty was at issue. Did
it rest in the state, or in the union? Should it
be placed in the people as a whole, or should it
be left in the hands of the local powers? The
eompromises in the constitution must be traced
to their causes if we are to have a full under
standing of the forces which were at work at
the time. Sectionalism may be seen in many
incidents occurring during these years, and es
pecially in the debates in the constitutional and
ratifying conventions. Slavery as a question
of a distracting import crops out in many places.
It was not yet at all an overshadowing issue,
but it made itself felt. Class interests and class
feelings are not absent. Creditor and debtor,
city and country, coast region and interior, are
all factors in determining the final form of the
struggle and its result.
In connection with the quotations from the
documentary records, extracts have been made
from the writings of a few of the great states
men of the time. It was the intention to have
presented the views of a greater number of the
statesmen of that day, but the usual plea has
i o be made that it takes a great amount of time
to go through hundreds of pages of matter to
find out the quotable material, and the time
was not at hand It is believed, however, that
the extracts made are directly to the point, and

74 AMERICAN HI.STORY STDDIBS.
will present the ideas of the day very sharpi^
and vividly.
Thomas Paine, in 1780, in "Public Good," aK
article arguing that the western territory
should belong to the United States collectively,
instead of to Virginia and other states individu
ally, concludes with these remarkable words:
I shall in this place take the opportunity of renewing
a hint which I formerly threw out in the Pamphlet
"Common Sense," and which the States will, sooner or
later, see the convenience, if not the necessity, of adopt
ing; which is, that of electing a continental conven
tion, for the purpose of forming a continental constitu
tion, describing and defining the powers and authority
of Congress. — Paine's Writings (Conway), vol. II, p. 66.
Washington's letters at least as early as 1780
show that he saw the necessity of a stronger
bond of union among the states than the one
which existed. Among other letters we find
one to Hamilton, 4 March, 1783.
The States cannot surely he so devoid of common
sense, common honesty, and common policy, as to re
fuse their aid on a full, clear, and candid representation
of facts from Congress. To me who know noth
ing of the business before Congress, nor of the arcana,
it appears that such a measure would tend to promote
the public weal; for it is clearly my opinion, unless
Congress have powers competent to all general pur
poses, that the distresses we have encountered, the
expense we have occurred, and the blood we have spilt,
will avail us nothing. — Washington, Works, vol. VIII, p.
39L On March 31, 1788, he writes again to Hamil
ton in these words:
My wish to see the union of these States established
upon liberal and permanent principles, and inclination
to contribute my mite in pointing out the defects of the
present constitution, are equally great No
man in the United States is or can be more deeply im
pressed with a necessity of a reform in our piesent

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 75
confederation than myself. No man perhaps has felt
the bad effects of it more sensibly; for to the defects
thereof, and want of power in Congress, may justly be
ascribed the prolongation of the war. . , . — Wash
ington, Works, vol. VIII, p. JflO.
To Lafayette he writes:
To avert these evils, to form a new constitution . .
Is a duty incumbent on every man . . .
In Washington's Circular Letter to the Gov
ernors, 8 June, 1783, he sets forth his hopes and
his fears again in eloquent words:
Such is our situation, and such are our prospects;
but, notwithstanding . happiness is ours, if we
have a disposition to seize the occasion and make it
our own; yet it appears to me there is an option still
left to the United States of America, that It
depends upon their conduct, whether they will be re
spectable and prosperous, or contemptible and misera
ble, as a nation. This is the time of their political
probation; this is the moment when the eyes of the
whole world are turned upon them; this Is the moment
to establish or ruin their national character forever;
this is the favorable moment to give such a tone to our
federal government as will enable it to answer the
ends of its institution, or this may be the ill-fated
moment for relaxing the powers of the Union, annihi
lating the cement ©( the confederation, and exposing us
to become the sport of European politics, which may
play one State against another . For, according
to the system of policy the States shall adopt at this
moment, they will stand or fall; and by their confirma
tion or lapse it is yet to be decided whether the revolu
tion must ultimately be considered a blessing or a
curse: a blessing or a curse, not to the present age
alone, for with our fate will the destiny of unborn
millions be involved.
There are four things which . . are essential
. to the existence of the United States, as an
Independent power.
First. An indissoluble union of the States under one
federal head.
Second. A sacred regard to public justice.

76 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Third. The adoption of a proper peace establishment;
and. Fourth. The prevalence of that pacific and friendly
disposition among the people of the United States
which will induce them to forget their local prejudices
and policies; . . — Washington, Works, vol. VIII, p.
i41-'43; also in "Old South Leaflets."
The following additional extracts from Wash
ington's letters show his opinions in regard to
the conditions of the times, and the necessity
for a stronger government.
Notwithstanding the jealous and contracted temper,
which seems to prevail in some of the States, yet I
cannot but hope and believe, that the good sense of the
people will ultimately get the better of their prejudices;
and that order and sound policy, though they do not
come so often as one would wish, will be produced from
the present unsettled and deranged state of public
affairs. Indeed, I am happy to observe that the political
disposition is actually ameliorating every day. Several
of the States have manifested an Inclination to Invest
Congress with more ample powers. . . . — To Jona
than Trumbull, Jr., Jan. 5, 1784.
That the prospect before us is . . fair, none can
deny. [But] the disinclination of the Individual States
to yield competent powers to Congress for the federal
government, their unreasonable jealousy of that body
and of one another, and the disposition, which seems to
pervade each, of being all-wise and all-powerful within
itself, will, if there Is not a change in the system, be
our downfall as a nation, and I think we have
opposed Great Britain, and have arrived at the present
state of peace and independency, to very little purpose.
If we cannot conquer our own prejudices. But
I have many [fears] and powerful ones Indeed, which
predict the worst consequences, from a half-starved,
limping government, that appears to be always moving
upon crutches, and tottering at every step. . . My
political creed, therefore, is, to be wise in the choice of
delegates, give them competent powers for all
federal purposes, support them in the due exercise
thereof, . . . — To Benjamin Barrison, IS January,
1784.

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 77
We are either a united people under one head and for
federal purposes, or we are thirteen Independent sover
eignties, eternally counteracting each other. If the
former, whatever such a majority of the States, as the
constitution points out, conceives to be for the benefit
of the whole, should be submitted to by the
minority. I confess to you candidly, that I can
foresee no evil greater than disunion: . As you
have asked the question, I answer, I do not know that
we can enter upon a war of Imposts with Great Britain,
or any other foreign power; but we are certain, that
this war has been waged against us by the former;,
professedly upon a belief that we never could unite in
opposition to It; and I believe there is no way of put
ting an end to [It] . • • but to convince them of the
contrary. To sum up the whole, I foresee the many ad
vantages which will arise from giving powers of this
kind to Congress without any evil save that
which may proceed from inattention, or want of wis
dom in the formation of the act; while without them,
we stand In a ridiculous view In the eyes of the nations
of the world, with whom we are attempting to enter
into commercial treaties, without the means of carrying
them into effect; who must see and feel that the Union
or the States individually are sovereigns, as best suits
their purposes; in a word that we are one nation to
day and thirteen to-morrow. — To James McEenry, 32
August, 1785.
The war has terminated most advanta
geously for America, and a fair field is presented to our
view; but I confess to you freely, dear Sir, that I do
not think we possess wisdom or justice enough to culti
vate It properly. Illiberality, jealousy, and local policy
mix too much In all our public councils for the good
government of the Union. In a word, the confedera
tion appears to me to be little more than a shadow
without substance, and Congress a nugatory body,
— To James Warren, 7 October, 1785.
My sentiments with respect to the federal government
are well known. Publicly and privately have they been
communicated without reserve; but my opinion Is, that
there Is more wickedness than ignorance In the conduct
of the States, or, in other words, in the conduct of those
who have too much Infiuence in the government of

78 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
them; and until the curtain Is withdrawn, and the
private views and selfish principles, upon which these
men act, are exposed to public notice, I have little hope
of amendment without another convention. — To Benry
Lee, 5 April, 1786.
I coincide perfectly with you that there are
errors in our national government which call for cor
rection; but I shall find myself happily mis
taken if the remedies are at hand. We are certainly in
a delicate situation; but my fear is that the people are
not yet sufficiently misled to retract from error. To be
plainer, I think there is more wickedness than igno
rance mixed in our councils. That It Is neces
sary to revise and amend the articles of confederation,
I entertain no doubt; but what may be the conse
quences of such an attempt is doubtful.
I think often of owf situation, and view It with con
cern. From the high ground we stood upon, from the
plain path which invited our footsteps, to be so fallen,
so lost, is really mortifying. But virtue, I fear, has in
a great degree taken its departure from our land, and
the want of a disposition to do justice is the source of
the national embarrassments; . — To John Jay, IS
May, 1786.
Is It not among the most unaccountable things in
nature, that the representatives of a great country
should generally be so thin as not to be able to execute
the functions of government. To what is this to be
ascribed? Be the causes what they may, it is
shameful and disgusting. In a word. It hurts us. Our
character as a nation is dwindling; and what it must
come to, our enemies have foretold; for in
truth we seem either not capable, or not willing to take
care of ourselves.
It was impolitic and unfortunate if not unjust in these
States to' pass laws, which by fair construction might
be considered as infractions of the treaty of peace. It
is good policy at all times to place one's adversary in
the wrong. Had we observed good faith, and the west-
em posts had then been withheld from us by Great
Britain, we might have appealed to God and man for
justice; . But now we cannot do this . —
To, William' Grayson, 26 July, 1786.
The greater part of the Union seems to be convinced
ot the necessity of federal measures, and of investing

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 79
Congress with the power of regulating the commerce of
the whole. — To de la Luzerne, 1 August, 1786.
What astonishing changes a few years are capable of
producing. I am told that even respectable characters
speak of a monarchical form of government without
horror. From thinking proceeds speaking; thence to
acting Is often but a single step. But how Irrevocable
and tremendous! What a triumph for our enemies to
verify their predictions! What a triumph for the ad
vocates of despotism to find that w6 are incapable of
governing ourselves, and that systems founded on the
basis of equal liberty are merely ideal and fallacious!—
To John Jay, 1 August, 1786.
You talk, my good Sir, of employing Infiuence to ap
pease the present tumults in Massachusetts. I know
not where that influence Is to be found, or, if attainable,
that it would be a proper remedy for the disorders.
Influence is not government. Let us have a government
by which our lives, liberties, and properties will be
secured, or let us know the worst at once. — To Henry
Lee, in Congress, 31 October, 1786.
Fain would I hope, that the great and most Important
of all subjects, the federal government, may be consid
ered with that calm and deliberate attention, which the
magnitude of it so critically and loudly calls for. Let
prejudices, unreasonable jealousies, and local interests
yield to reason and liberality.
[In] a letter from General Knox,
among other things he says, "Their creeds, that the
property of the United States has been protected from
the confiscation of Britain by the joint exertions of all,
and therefore ought to be the common property of all," .
They are determined to annihilate all debts, public and
private, and have agrarian laws, . . — To James
Madison, 5 November, 1786.
By a late act, it seems very desirous of a general con
vention to revise and amend the federal constitution.
A-propos: what prevented the eastern States from at
tending the September meeting at Annapolis? Of all
the States in the Union It should seem, tha,t a measure
of this sort, distracted as they were with internal com
motions and experiencing the want of energy in the
government, would have been most pleasing to them. —
To Henry Knox, 26 December, 1786.
I am Indirectly and delicately pressed to attend this

80 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
convention [Philadelphia, 1787]. Several reasons are
opposed to It In my mind [Partly personal.]
A thought has lately run through my mind, however,
which is accompanied with embarrassment. It is
whether my non-attendance In the convention will
not be considered as a dereliction of republicanism.
[Some friends advised him to attend, others the con
trary. It was about three months after appointment
before he decided, to accept.] — To Henry Knox, 8 March,
1787. Every attempt to amend the constitution at this time
Is in my opinion idle and vain. If there are characters,
who prefer disunion, or separate confederacies, to the
general government, which is offered to them, their
opposition may, for aught I know, proceed from prin
ciple; but, as nothing, according to my conception ol
the matter, is more to be deprecated than a disunion or
these distinct confederations, as far as my voice can go
it shall be offered in favor of the latter. — To David
Stuart, SO November, 1787.
Should it [the constitution] be adopted, and I think
it will be, America will lift up her head again, and in a
few years become respectable among the nations. It ia
a flattering . reflection that our rising republics
,<»ave the good wishes of all the philosophers, patriots.
and virtuous men in all nations; and that they look
upon them as a kind of asylum for mankind. God
grant that we may not disappoint their honest expecta
tions by our folly or perverseness. — To the Marquis de
Chastellux, 25 April, 1788.
The above extracts are all taken from Spark's
Writings of Washington, vol. IX, pp. 5, 12-13,
121-24,' 140, 156, 166, 178-80, 183, 189, 204-206,
226, 238, 284, 297.
Part of the extracts from Jefferson's writings
are taken from the edition of his work of 1830,
and part from the new edition by Ford, pub
lished in 1895.
I remain In hopes of great and good effects from the
decisions of the Assembly [Constitutional Convention]
over which you are presiding. To make our States one
as to all foreign concerns, preserve them several as to
all merely domestic, to give to the federal head some

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 81
peaceable mode of enforcing Its just authority, to
organize that head into legislative, executive, and
judiciary departments, are great desiderata in our fed
eral constitution. — Jefferson to Washington, Works of
Jefferson fed. 1830), vol. II, p. 222.
I find by the public papers that your Commercial Con
vention failed In point of representation. If it should
produce a full meeting in May and a broader reforma
tion. It will still be well. To make us one nation as to
foreign concerns, and keep us distinct in Domestic ones,
gives the outline of the proper division of power be
tween the general and particular governments. But
to enable the Federal head to exercise the power given
it, to best advantage. It should be organized, as the
particular ones are, Into Legislative, Executive, and
Judiciary. The 1st and last are already separated. The
2d should also be. When last with Congress I often
proposed to members to do this by making of the Com
mittee of the states, an Executive committee during the
recess of Congress and during Its sessions to appoint a
Committee to receive and dispatch all executive busi
ness, so that Congress Itself should meddle only with
what should be legislative. — Jefferson to Madison, Dec.
to, 1788, Works,_vol. TV, p. 331.
The negative proposed to be given them [Congress]
on all the acts of the several legislatures Is now for the
first time suggested to my mind. Prima facie I do not
like it. It fails in the essential character that the hole
and the patch should be commensurate. But this pro
poses to mend a small hole by covering the whole gar
ment. Would not an appeal from the State
Judicatures to a federal court in all cases where the
act of. Confederation controlled the question, be as
effectual a remedy, and exactly commensurate to the
defect? . An appeal to a federal court sets all
to rights. It will be said that this court may encroach
on the jurisdiction of the state courts. It may. But
there will be a power, to-wit. Congress, to watch and
restrain them. But place the same authority in Con
gress itself, and there will be no power above them to
perform the same office. . — Jefferson to Madison,
June SO, 1787, Works, vol. IV, pp. 390-91.
Our new constitution is powerfully attacked in th'S
newspapers. The objections are that it would be to
form the 13 states Into one: that proposing to melt all

82 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
down Into one general government they have fenced
the people by no declaration of rights, they have not
renounced the power of keeping a standing army, they
have not secured the liberty of the press, they have re
served the power of abolishing trial by jury In civil
cases, they have abandoned rotation in office;
and particularly their president may be re-elected from
4 years to 4 years for life, so as to render him a king
for life like a king of Poland, and have not given him
either the check or aid of a council. You will
see that these objections are serious, and some of them
not without foundation. — To William Carmichael, Paris,
Deo. 15, 1787, Jefferson's Works (1895 ed.), vol. IV, p. 470.
I like much the general idea of framing a
government which should go on of itself peacefully,
without needing continual recurrence to the state legis
latures. I like the organization of the government into
Legislative, Judiciary and Executive. I like the power
given the Legislature to levy taxes, I am cap
tivated by the compromise of the opposite claims of
the great and little states, of the latter to equal and the
former to proportional influence. I am much pleased
too with the substitution of the method of voting by
persons, instead of voting by states; and I like the
negative given to the Executive . There are
other good things of less moment. I will now add
what I do not like. First the omission of a bill of
rights providing clearly and without the aid of soph
isms for freedom of religion, freedom of the press, pro
tection against standing armies, restriction against
monopolies, the eternal and unremitting force of the
habeas corpus laws, and trials by jury in all matters of
fact triable by the laws of the land and not by the law
of nations. Let me add that a bill of rights is
what the people are entitled to against every govern
ment on earth, general or particular, and just what no
just government should refuse, or rest on inferences.
The second feature I dislike, . . is the abandon
ment in every instance of the necessity of rotation in
office, and most particularly In the case of the Presi
dent. [Here a prediction follows which has not been
fulfllled."! . I do not pretend to decide what
would be the best method of procuring the establish
ment of the manifold good things in this constitution,
and of getting rid of the bad. I own I am not

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 83
a friend to a very energetic government. It Is always
oppressive. The late rebellion In Massachusetts has
given more alarm than I think it should have done.
. . After all, It Is my principle that the will of the
majority should always prevail. If they approve the
proposed convention in all Its parts, I shall concur in
it cheerfully, in hopes that they will amend It when
ever they shall find it work wrong. I think our gov
ernments will remain virtuous for many centuries; as
long as they are chiefly agricultural; and this will be
as long as there shall be vacant lands in any part of
America. When they get piled upon one another in
large cities, as in Europe, they will become corrupt as
in Europe. . — To James Madison, Paris, Deo. 20,
1787, lb., 474-76. PUBLIC ACTION.
The powers of the delegates to the first Conti
nental Congress of 1774 will indicate the pur
pose for which these delegates came together.
The instructions to the Virginia and Maryland
delegates illustrate the spirit of all.
Virginia: To consider of the most proper and effect
ual manner of so operating on the Commercial conven
tion of the Colonies with the Mother country, as to
procure redress for the much-injured Province of
Massachusetts Bay, to secure British America from the
ravage and ruin of arbitrary taxes, and speedily to
procure the return of that harmony and union so ben
efieial to the whole Empire, and so ardently desired by
all British America.
Mabtiand: To attend a General Congress to assist
one general plan of conduct operating on the Commer
cial connection of the Colonies with the mother coun
try, for the relief of Boston and the preservation of
American Liberty.
The Congress of 1774 passed the following
resolutions in regard to the vote of the various
delegations present:
Resolved, That, In determining questions In this Con
gress, each colony or province shall have one vote; the
Congress not being possessed of, or at present able to

84 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
procure, proper materials for ascertaining the impor
tance of each colony. — Journal of Congress, vol. I, p. 7.
On October 20, 1774, this Congress passed the
Non- importation agreement. It has sometimes
been called the beginning of the government of.
the United States.
[Name grievances, then say] To obtain redress of
these grievances, we are of opinion, that a
non-importation, non-consumption, and non-exporta
tion agreement, faithfully adhered to, will prove the
most speedy, effectual, and peaceable measure: [terms
follow] . .
Sec. 11. That a committee be chosen in every county,
city and town by those who are qualified to vote for
representatives in the legislature whose business it
shall be attentively to observe the conduct of all per
sons touching this association; and when it shall be
made to appear that any person has
violated this association that [his name bf>T published
in the gazette; to the end that all such foes to the
rights of British-America may be publicly known, and
universally contemned as the enemies of American lib
erty; and thenceforth we respectively will break off all
dealings with him or her.
Sec. 12. That the committee of correspondence, in the
respective colonies, do frequently inspect the entries of
their custom-houses, and inform each other, . .
of the true state thereof.
Sec. 14. And we do further agree and resolve, that
we will have no trade or dealings
with any colony or province in North America, which
shall not accede to or which hereafter shall violate this
association, but will hold them as unworthy of the
rights of freemen, and as inimical to the liberties of
their country.
And we do solemnly bind ourselves and our constitu
ents, to adhere to this association, until [re
dress or grievances obtained]. — Journal of Congress, vol.
I. pp. 23-25.
The Congress of 1775 met for the same pur
pose, but soon had to begin to act as a revolu
tionary body, and carried on the government

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 86
and the war till 1781, when the articles of con
federation were adopted.
ARTICLES OP CONFEDERATION.
Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union be
tween the states of New Hampshire, Massachusetts
Bay Article I. The style of this Confederacy shall be
"The United States of America."
Article II. Each State retains its sovereignty, free
dom and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction
and right which is not .. expressly delegated.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter
into a firm league of friendship with each other,
binding themselves to assist each other against all
force offered to, or made upon them,
Even before the Articles of Confederation
were ratified by the last state, Maryland, a pro
posal had been made in Congress, on February
3, 1781, to submit the following amendment to
the states for their action. It failed of adop
tion: Resolved, That it be recommended to the several
States, that they vest a power in Congress to
levy, for the use of the United States, a duty of five per
cent ad valorum, at the time and place of im
portation, upon all goods, of foreign growth
or manufacture,
That the moneys arising from said duties be appro
priated to the discharge of the principal and interest
of the debts already contracted . . . — Elliat's De-
hates, vol. I, p. 92.
On April 18, 1783, a second attempt to secure
an amendment was made, which also failed of
final adoption.
Resolved, by nine States, that it be recommended to
the several States as Indispensably necessary to the
restoration of public credit, . . to invest the
United States In Congress assembled, with the power
to levy, for the use of the United States, the following
duties upon goods imported into the said States from

86 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
any foreign port, &c. [List of articles.] —
Elliot'* Debates, vol. I, p. 93.
On the 30th of April, 1784, Congress recom
mended for a third time an amendment to the
articles, which was finally defeated by the ac
tion of New York, in the winter of 1786-87. The
reasons for the proposed amendment read in
part as follows, and are very important as show
ing one of the direct causes that led to the
calling of the Constitutional Convention :
The trust reposed in Congress renders it their duty
to be attentive to the conduct of foreign nations, and
to prevent or restrain, all such proceedings
as might prove injurious to the United States. The
situation of Commerce at this time claims the atten
tion of the several states, and few objects of greater
importance can present themselves to their notice
[reasons given].
Already has Great-Britain adopted regulations de
structive of our commerce with her West-India island.
There was reason to expect that measures so unequal
and so little calculated to promote mercantile inter
course, would not be persevered in by an enlightened
nation. It would be the duty of Congress, as
it Is their wish, to meet the attempts of Great-Britain
with similar restrictions on her commerce; but their
powers on this head are not explicit, and the proposi
tions made by the legislatures of the several states
render It necessary to take the general sense of the
nation on this subject.
Unless the United States in Congress assembled, shall
be vested with powers competent to the protection of
commerce, they can never command reciprocal advan
tages in trade; and without these, our foreign com
merce must decline, and eventually be annihilated.
Hence it is necessary that . foreign commerce,
not founded on principles of equality, may be re
strained, . to secure such terms they have
Resolved, That It be . recommended to the
legislatures of the several states, to vest the United
States, In Congress assembled, for the term of fifteen
years, with power to prohibit any goods from
being imported into or exported from any of the

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 87
States, In vessels belonging to . . . the subjects of
any foreign power with whom these states shall not
have formed treaties of commerce.
Resolved, That it be . recommended,
to vest the United States, In Congress assembled, for
the term of 15 years, with the power of prohibiting the
subjects of any foreign state unless author
ized by treaty, from importing into the United States
any goods which are not the product
of the dominions of the sovereign whose subjects they
are. After the failure of these various attempts to
amend the Articles of Confederation, the friends
of greater power in the Union turned to the call
ing of a convention for taking the question into
consideration. Virginia was the first state to
act, and on January 21, 1786, its legislature
passed the following resolution:
Resolved, that Edmund Randolph,_ James Madison,
be appointed commissioners, who or any five of
whom, shall meet such commissioners as may be ap
pointed by other States in the Union, to take
into consideration the trade of the United States; to
examine the relative situation of the trade of the said
States, . and to report to the several States such
an act relative to this great object as when unani
mously ratified by them, will enable the United States
in Congress assembled, to provide for the same
[Notice of action sent to other states.] — Elliot's De
bates, vol. I, p. 115.
Commissioners from four other states, New
York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware,
met with those from Virginia, and sent out a
letter to the other states and to Congress asking
that a convention be held on the second Monday
of the following May. The interesting para
graphs in their resolutions for us read as fol
lows: To the Honorable the Legislatures of Virginia, etc.,
. . the Commissioners from the said States,
humbly beg leave to report: . That the State of

88 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
New Jersey had enlarged the object of their appoint
ment, empowering their commissioners, "to consider
how far an uniform system In their commercial regula
tions, jnd other important matters, might be necessary
to tho ctmrnon interest and permanent harmony of the
several States": [Your commissioners believe
this] was an improvement on the original plan, and
will deserve to be incorporated into that of a future
Convention, Under this impression, your Commissioners, . .
beg leave to suggest their unanimous conviction that
[Commissioners should meet] at Philadelphia on the
second Monday in May next, to take into consideration
the situation of the United States; to devise such
further provisions as shall appear to them necessary to
render the constitution of the Federal Government ade
quate to the exigencies of the Union; and to report
such an act for that purpose, to the United States in
Congress assembled, as, when agreed to by them, and
afterwards confirmed by the Legislatures of every State,
will effectually provide for the same. — Madison's Jour
nal of the Constitutional Convention, pp. 38-40. (Albert,
Scott <£ Co. edition.)
Congress took this resolution of the Annapo
lis convention into consideration, and finally
passed, on February 21, 1787, the following:
Resolved, That In the opinion of Congress, it Is ex
pedient that, on the second Monday In May next, a
Convention of Delegates, who shall have been appointed
by the several States, be held at Philadelphia for the
sole and express purpose of revising the Article of
Confederation, and reporting to Congress and the sev
eral legislatures, such alterations and provisions therein
as shall, when agreed to in Congress, and confirmed by
the States, render the federal Constitution adequate to
the exigencies of Government, and the preservation of
the Union. — Journal of Congress, vol, IV, p. — .
The legislatures of all the states, except
Rhode Island, acted in conformity to this resolu
tion, and sent delegates to Philadelphia. They
met and organized on May 25, and adjourned
on September 17, 1787. The present constitn-

FORMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 8b
tion is the result of their labors. The powers
granted by the various state legislatures to their
delegates may be seen from the following ex
tracts :
Georgia. Be It ordained, by the Representatives of
the State of Georgia, . . that William Pew, Abra
ham Baldwin . be, . appointed Commis
sioners, who . are authorized to meet
such deputies as may be appointed and authorized, by
other States and to join with them in devis
ing and discussing all such alterations and further pro
visions as may be necessary to render the Federal Con
stitution adequate to the exigencies of the Union, and
in reporting such an act for that purpose to the United
States in Congress assembled, as, when agreed to by
them, and duly confirmed by the several States, will
effectually provide for the same. . . — Elliot, De-
hates, vol. I, pp. 126-138.
Massachusetts. Whereas, Congress did, on the 21st
day of February, 1787, Resolve, That, ... a Con
vention of Delegates, be held at Philadelphia,
for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles
oi Confederation . . [rest of resolution quoted].
Now, therefore, etc. [Francis Dana, Elbridge Gerry,
Nathaniel Gorham, Rufus King, and Caleb Strong com
missioned as delegates.]
Connecticut. Whereas, The Congress of the United
States, . . . have recommended that, . a
convention . be held at Philadelphia, for the
sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Con
federation; [names of delegates follow].
New York. Resolved, that Hon. Robert Yates, John
Lansing, Jr., and Alexander Hamilton, Esqs. be
appointed delegates to meet such delegates
. . at Philadelphia, for the sole and express pur
pose of revising the Articles of Confederation . .
[etc as In Georgia].
New Jeeset. The Council and Assembly ,
have appointed you [names follow here] to meet such
Commissioners ... as may be appointed by the
other States in the Union, for the purpose of
taking into consideration, the state of the Union, as to
^rade and other important objects, and of devising such
Bther provisions as shall appear to be necessary tcr

90 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
render the Constitution of the Federal Government
adequate to the exigencies thereof.
Pennsylvania. Be it enacted . that [names
members.] are hereby constituted and appointed Depu
ties from this State . to meet such Deputies as
may be appointed . by other States , and
join with them in devising, deliberating on, and dis
cussing, all such alterations and further provisions as
may be necessary to render the Federal Constitution
fully adequate to the exigencies of the Union,
Delaware. [Almost the same as Pennsylvania.]
Makyiand. [Almost same wording as Pennsylva
nia.] Virginia. [Same wording aa Pennsylvania.]
North Carolina. For the purpose of revising the
Federal Constitution.
South Carolina. By virtue of the power and au
thority invested by the Legislature of this State, I do
hereby commission you [names] to meet such Deputies
and to join with [them] in devising and dis
cussing all such alterations, clauses, articles and pro
visions, as may be thought necessary to render the
Federal Constitution entirely adequate to the actual
situation and future good government of the Confed
erated States; . [which] when approved and
agreed to by them [the United States] and duly ratified
and confirmed by the several States, will effectually
provide for the exigencies of the Union.
New Hampshire. . . To remedy the defects of
our Federal Union. . . .
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.
Madison's Journal of the Constitutional Con
vention ought to be in the hands of every
teacher who gives instruction in the history and
civil government of the United States. No li
brary can be considered complete without it.
A few extracts are made which will illustrate
some ol the great issues discussed in the con
vention, and the position taken on them by the
members of the convention. However, it is not
possible to give an adequate idea of the value
of this work from any short extracts.

FORMATION OF CONSTITUTION. 91
After three days spent in organizing, adopt
ing rules, and determining on plans, the debate
began. Governor Randolph, of Virginia, pre
sented the first plan and opened his speech as
follows, as given by Madison :
He observed, that, In revising the Federal sys
tem we ought to inquire, first, into the properties which
such a government ought to possess; secondly, the de
fects of the Confederation; thirdly, the danger of our
situation; and fourthly, the remedy.
(1.) The character of such a government ought to be
secure, first against foreign invasion; secondly against
dissensions between members of the Union, or sedi
tions in particular States; thirdly to procure to the
several States various blessings of which an isolated
situation was incapable; fourthly, it should be able to
defend itself against encroachments; and fifthly, to be
paramount to the State Constitutions. — Journal of the
Constitutional Convention, p. 59.
Then, after discussing the defects and dan
gers, he proposed fifteen resolutions as the basis
of a remedy. Among these resolutions the fol
lowing may be cited:
1. Resolved, that the Articles of Confederation ought
to be so corrected and enlarged as to accomplish the
objects proposed by their institution; namely, "com
mon defense, security of liberty, and general welfare."
3. Resolved, that the National Legislature ought to
consist of two branches.
7. Resolved, that a National Executive be Instituted,
9. Resolved, that a National Judiciary be established;
. .—lb., pp. 59-62.
On May 30 Mr. Randolph mad« a motion
which led to action that has been much dis
cussed, and concerning which very different
opinions have been expressed. He moved that
his first proposition, above cited, should be post
poned in order to consider the three following:
(1.) That a union of the States merely fedpral will

92 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
not accomplish the objects proposed by the Articles of
Confederation, namely
(2.) That no treaty or treaties among the whole or
part of the States, as individual sovereignties, would be
sufficient. (S.) That a national government ought to be estab
lished, consisting of a supreme Legislative, Executive
and Judiciary.
Consideration of the first and second of the
above resolutions was deferred ; the third, after
some debate, was adopted. In the course of the
debate Gen. Pinckney said :
he doubted whether the act of Congress recommending
the convention, or the commissions of the Deputies to
It, would authorize a discussion of a system founded on
different principles from the Federal Constitution.
Mr. Gouverneltr Morris explained the distinction
between a federal and a national, supreme government,
the former being a mere compact resting on the good
faith of the parties; the latter having a complete and
compulsive operation.
After the adoption of this resolution, in the
discussion of another question, Mr. Madison
abserved, that, whatever reason might have existed for
the equality of suffrage when the Union was a federal
one among sovereign States, it must cease when a
national government should be put into the place.
May 31, a debate took place over Mr. Ran
dolph's fourth resolution, "that the members of
the first branch of the National Legislature ought
to be elected by the people of the several states,"
which throws much light on the spirit of the
time, and of the convention.
Mr. Sherman opposed the election by the people, in
sisting that It ought to be by the State Legislatures.
The people, he said, immediately should have as little
to do as may be about the government. They want in
formation, and are constantly liable to be misled.
Mr. Gerrt. The evils we experience flow from the
excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue.

formation OF constitution. 93
but are the dupes of pretended patriots. ... He
had, he said, been too republican heretofore; he was
Btlll, however, republican; but had been taught by ex
perience the danger of the leveling spirit
Me. Mason. ... He admitted that we had been
too democratic, but was afraid we should Incautiously
run into the opposite extreme.
Mb. WtLSON contended strenuously for drawing the
most numerous branch of the Legislature immediately
from the people. He was for raising the federal pyra
mid to a considerable altitude, and for that reason
wished to give It as broad a basis as possible. No gov
ernment could long subsist without the confidence of
the people.
Me. Madison considered the popular election of one
branch of the National Legislature as essential to every
plan of free government. .
Me. Randolph. . He observed that the gen
eral object was to provide a cure for the evils under
which the United States labored; that In tracing these
evils to their origin, ever man had found It in the
turbulence and follies of *emocracy; that some check
therefore was to be sought for against this tendency of
our governments; and that a good senate seemed more
likely to answer the purpose. — lb., pp. 73-81.
Col. Mason. Under the existing Confederacy, Con
gress represents the States, and not the people of the
States; their acts operate on the States, not on the indi
viduals. The case will be changed in the new plan of
government. The people will be represented; they
ought therefore to choose the Representatives. .
—n., p. 116.
Me. Wilson. ... He did not see the danger of the
States being devoured by the national government. On
the contrary, he wished to keep them from devouring
the National Government. . . .—lb., p. 128.
One of the most diflBcult questions before the
convention was how to settle the varying inter
ests of the large and the small state?^ At one
time it seems as if the convention would break
up over the question. A few expressions taken
here and there from the debate may help us to
understand the bitterness of feeling.

94 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Mr. Patterson. . . The convention, he said,
was formed in pursuance of an act of Congress; .
that the amendment of the Confederacy was the object
of all the laws and commissions on the subject
The Idea of a National Government, as contradistin
guished from a federal one, never entered into the
mind of any of them. He was strongly attached to the
plan of the existing Confederacy, in which the people
choose their legislative representatives; and the Legis
latures their federal representatives. . . He al
luded to the hint thrown out by Me. Wilson, of the
necessity to which the large States might be reduced;
of confederating among themselves. . . New Jer
sey will never confederate on the plan before the
Committee. She would not be swallowed up. He had
rather submit to a monarch, to a despot, than to such
a fate. .
Mr. Wilson hoped, if the Confederacy should be
dissolved, that a majority,— na,j, a minority of the
States would unite for their safety. — 16., pp. 1S9-41.
At this point Mr. Patterson introduced the so-
called New Jersey plan, which provided only
for amending the Articles of Confederation.
The debate was renewed with the following re
sult: Mb. Wilson. . . With regard to the power of
the convention, he conceived himself authorized to con
clude nothing, but to be at liberty to propose anything.
With regard to the sentiments of the people, he
conceived it difficult to know precisely what they are.
. . . Why should a National Government be unpopu
lar? . Will a citizen of Delaware be degraded by
becoming a citizen of the United States?
Me. Pinckney. The whole thing comes to this . .
Give New Jersey an equal vote, and she will dismiss her
Bcruples, and concur in the National system. — lb., pp.
171-174. On June 19, by a vote of seven states to three,
it was carried to take up Mr. Randolph's plan
instead of Mr. Patterson's.
Ma. Wilson. Can we forget for whom we are form-

FORMATION OF CONSTITUTION. 95
ing a government? Is it for men, or for the imaginary
beings called States? . — 76., p. 272.
De. Feanklin. The diversity of opinions turns on
two points. If a proportional representation takes
place, the small States contend that their liberties will
be In danger. If an equality of votes is to be put tn its
place, the large States say their money will be in dan
ger. . .
Me. Dayton. . . . He considered the system on
the table as a novelty, an amphibious monster; and
was persuaded that it never would be received by the
people. Me. Maratin would never confederate. If it could not
be done on just principles.
Me. Bedford contended, that there was no middle
way between a perfect consolidation, and a mere con
federacy of the States. The first Is out of the question;
and in the latter they must continue, if not perfectly,
yet equally sovereign. The large States dare
not dissolve the confederation. If they do the small
States will find a foreign ally, of more honor and good
faith, who will take them by the hand, and do them
justice. Me. Gerry. . . If no compromise should take
place, what will be the consequence. A secession he
foresaw would take place, for some gentlemen seemed
decided on It. .—76., p. 297.
Mr. Gouverneue Moeris regretted the turn of thei
debate. The States, he found, had many representa
tives on the floor. Few, he feared, were to be deemed
the Representatives of America. He thought the South
ern States have, by this Report, more than their share
of representation. . . . — 76., p. 377.
On Monday, July 16, the turning point in the
convention came. After a very deep and ear
nest, if not bitter, discussion, a compromise was
seen to be practicable, by which the Senate and
the House, as we now have them, came into
being. It was some days later, however, before
the formal terms were agreed upon.
Mb. Randolph. ... He could not but think that
we were unprepared to discuss this subject further. It
will probably be in vain to come to any final decision

So AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
with a bare majority on either side. For these reasons
he wished the Convention to adjourn, that the large
States might consider the steps proper to be taken, in
the present solemn crisis of the business; and that the
small States tnight also deliberate on the means of
conciliation. Mr. Patterson thought that it was high tlme'for the
Convention to adjourn; that the rule of secrecy ought
to be rescinded; and that our constituents should be
consulted. No conciliation could be admissible on the
part of the smaller States, on any other ground than
than of an equality of votes in the second branch [the
Senate]. If Mr. Randolph would reduce to form his
motion for an adjournment sine die, he would second it
with all his heart.
Me. Rutlidge could see no need of an adjournment
because he could see no chance of a compromise. The
little States were fixed. All that the large
States, then, had to do was, to decide whether they
would yield or not. — ^76., pp. S5S-59.
There is not space for the proceedings in
many of the ratifying conventions. But as the
form of words was not greatly different, a few
cases will illustrate the spirit, and in the main,
the form in all.
Delaware. We, the Deputies of the People of the
Delaware State, in Convention met, having taken into
our serious consideration the Federal Constitution, pro
posed and agreed upon by the Deputies of the United
States, in a General Convention, held at the City of
Philadelphia, have approved, assented to, rati
fied, and confirmed, and by these presents do,
for and In behalf of ourselves and our constituents,
fully, freely, and entirely approve of, assent to, ratify,
and confirm, the said Constitution. — EUiofs Debates,
vol. 7, p. 319.
Pennsylvania. In the name of the people of Penn
sylvania. Be it known unto all men that we
have assented to and ratified and by these presents do
. In the name and by the authority of the same
people, and for ourselves, assent to and ratify the fore
going Constitution for the United States of America.
. . .—ElUot'g Debates, vol. I, p. S19.

FOBMATION OP CONSTITUTION. 97

CTJBSTIONS.
1. Who was Thomas Paine? 2. What Important
part did he play in the American revolution? 3. What
the style of his writings? 4. Has he had justice done
him by American historians? 6. What view does he
take of the western lands? 6. When was "Common
Sense" written? 7. What relation did he believe the
States ought to sustain to each other? 8. What did
he desire a continental convention for? 9. Did time
prove him right? 10. Was Washington hopeful of the
(future in 1783? 11. Did he feel any changes were
necessary? 12. Compile from all his letters the rea
sons he considers the Articles of Confederation defect
ive. 18. Was Washington a hopeful man or not?
14. Did he love his State or the Union tlie more?
15. Did Washington believe that morally the people
iwere improving or not? 16. What do you think of
the four things Washington believed to be essential
for our prosperity? 17. Why does he talk so much of
local prejudices? IS. What is the important point in
Washington's philosophy of government? 19. Where
iwas sovereignty located in Washington's view under
the Confederacy? 20. In what way was Great Britain
getting the better of us? 21. Does Washington get
more or less hopeful as the years pass? 22. Had the
treaty with England been kept? 23. Name the doc
trine set forth In Knox's letter to Washington, quoted
in his letter to Madison. 24. In what section did
Washington think there was the greatest need of re
form? 25. Give reason Washington assigned for
attending the Constitutional Convention. 26. What
does it show concerning his character? 27. Look up
other reasons. 28. When do Washington's fears begin
to lessen? 29. Do you find any difference in the tone
of the letters of Washington and Jefferson? 30. What
kind of powers does the latter wish given to Congress?
31. Name the various changes he would have made in
the Articles of Confederation. 32. What proposal does
he object to? 33. Was he right or wrong? 34. What
power did he propose to place In the hands of the
courts? 35. Name the powers he ^iked in the new
constitution. 36. Name those he objected to. 37.
Were his objections well founded? 38. Is he or
Washington the more constructive? 39. Name the
motive which prompted the meeting of the first Con
tinental Congress. 40. How did they vote? 41.
What effect later of this action? 42. When did the
enforcing power of the Union begin? 43. What
kind of a government formed by the Articles of Con
federation? ^4. Name the proposed amendments to
the Articles of Confederation. 45. Would It have
been best to have had them adopted? 46. What ques
tion directly led to the Constitutional Convention? 47
Name the conventions held. 48. What was the work

98 AMERICAN HiBiOKY STUDIES.
of the Annapolis convention? 49. What did it wish
the next one to do? 50. What powers had the dele
gates to the Constitutional Convention? 51. For what
purpose did Congress call the convention? 52. Did the
convention act within its granted powers? 53. What
important changes proposed in Articles of Confedera
tion by Randolph? 54. What change did he make
later in the nature of his resolutions? 55. What does
the debate in the convention indicate in regard to the
nature of the government under the Articles? 56.
Under the Constitution? 57. What marked difference
between a national and a federal government? 58.
Were the members of the convention believers in de
mocracy? 59. Name those friendly to the Idea — those
opposed. 60. Explain why so many opposed to the
idea. 61. What ideas contending for mastery in the
convention? 62. Over what question did the conven
tion come nearest breaking up? 63. Form of ratifica
tion of constitution. 64. Who adopted the constitu
tion? 65. Write an essay on the defects of the Articles
of Confederation. 66. On the political ideas and spirit
of Washington and Jefferson; comparisons. 67. On
the growth of the idea of Union. 68. On who stood for
the best idea'- on the whole in the Constitutional Con
vention. 69. Were the people then more moral than
now? 70. Compare ideas of nationality and localism

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES—
Monthly.
EUROPEAN HISTORY STUDIES—
Monthly.
STUDIES IN EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN"
HISTORY— 337 pp.; cloth. Fling and Caldwell.

AINSWORTH & COMPANY,
.S78-388 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, 111.

American History Studies

No. 5,

JANUARY, 1898.

INTERPRETATION OE THE CONSTITUTION;
NATIONALITY.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W. CALDWELL,
university of NEBRASKA.

J. H. MILLER, Publisher,
LINCOLN, NEBRASKA.

Tearly Subscription, to cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

Pdelxshed Monthly, E.xcept July and August.
Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office, Lincoln, Nebraska,
U. S. A.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

INTEEPRETATION OF THE CONSTITU
TION; NATIONALITY.
^HE Constitution formed in 1787 has been
in process of growth ever since through in
terpretation and construction. Of course,
it has also grown by the addition of fifteen
amendments. In time these have been con
tracted or expanded by the meanings which have
been attached to them by the various depart
ments of the government. Perhaps the courts,
and especially the Supreme Court of the United
States, have been the most potent factors in this
development, yet it must ever be kept in mind
that the political departments of the govern
ment, namely, the legislative and the executive,
have also to give final decisions in all politicai
questions; and the first interpretation of the Con
stitution, in law making, in all questions which
may become judicial as well.
There is scarcely a clause of the Constitution
which has not been subjected to this process.
It may, perhaps, be stated without exaggeration
that there is not a clause in the Constitution so
clear that varying ideas in regard to its meaning
have not been set forth at some time by someone.
It is also true that the Constitution as a whole
had to have an interpretation placed upon it.
Before a final decision was given, the court of
armies was called in. The most desperate civil
war of all history was needed to decide upon the
location of sovereignty. Had it not been f^r the
existence of sectional slavery, it is probable that
there would never have arisen the necessity for

GROWTH OF NATIONALITY. 101
making the decision. Yet we must notice that
when an attempt was made in our Constitution
to place some powers in the central government,
and to leave others in the states, the line of divis
ion drawn was an indefinite one, hence the
chance came for such a struggle. We have
already noticed the many factors which were
tending to localism, and the counter ones which
were developing a feeling of nationality as well
as the fact. In this paper the larger part of the
extracts are to show the varying interpretations
of the Constitution connected with this idea of
nationality. This discussion played in the main
around the question of implied powers, the loca
tion of sovereignty, the slavery issue, and the
right of determining the institutions of the terri
tories. It 'would be claiming too much to say
that in treating these topics one had exhausted
the subject. In the brief space allotted me I
can do no more than give a fair insight into the
first two, and touch the others.
IMPLIED POWERS.
The doctrine of "implied powers" first arose
in connection with the establishment of the
national bank in 1791. On this subject I have
let Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison speak.
Mr. Jefferson in his letter to President Washing
ton uses the following arguments:
It Is an established rule of construction when a
phrase will bear either of two meanings to give it
that which will allow some meaning to the oth«r
parts of the instrument, and not that which would
render all the others useless. Certainly no such
universal power was meant to he given them. It
was intended to lace them up straightly within the
enumerated powers, and those without which, as
means, these powers could not be carried into effect.
It Is known that the very power now proposed as a
means, was rejected as an end, by the convention
which formed the constitution. . , .

102 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
The second general phrase is, "to make all laws
necessary and proper for carrying into execution the
enumerated powers." But they can all be carried
into execution without a bank.
The constitution allows only the means
which are "necessary," not those which are merely
"convenient" for effecting the enumerated powers.
If such a latitude of construction be allowed to this
phrase a.s to give any non-enumerated power, it will
go to every one, for there is not one which ingenuity
may not torture into a convenience in some instance
or other. It would swallow up all the dele
gated powers, and reduce the whole to one power as
before observed. Therefore it was that the constitu
tion restrained them to the necessary means. Can it
be thought that the constitution intended that for a
shade or two of convenience, more or less, congress
should be authorized to break down the most ancient
and fundamental laws? — Writings of Thomas Jeffer
son, vol. V (1895 ed.), pp. 286-289.
Hamilton argues for the constitutionality of
the bank, and in doing this struck a great blow
for nationality. Some of the most telling points
of his argument are these:
Now it appears to the Secretary of the Treasury that
this general principle is inherent in the very definition of
government, and essential to every step of the progress
to be made by that of the United States, namely, that
every power vested in a government is in its nature
SOVEREIGN, and includes, by force of the term, a right to
employ all the means requisite, and fairly applicable,
to the attainment of the ends of such power, and which
are not precluded by restrictions and exceptions speci-
fieji in the constitution; or not immoral; or not con
trary to the essential ends of political society.
It is not denied that there are implied as well as ex
press powers, and that the former are as effectually
delegated as the latter; and there is another
class of powers, which may be properly denominated
resulting powers. It will not be doubted that if the
United States should make a conquest of any of the ter
ritories of its neighbors they would possess sovereign
jurisdiction over the conquered territory. This would

GROWTH OF NATIONALITY. 103
rather be the result from the whole mass of the powers
of the government, and from the nature of political
society, than a consequence of either of the powers
specially enumerated.
Then . as a power of erecting a corporation
may as well be implied as any other thing; it may as
well be employed as an, instrument or means of carry
ing into execution any of the specified powers, as any
other instrument or means whatever.
Necessary often means no more than needful,
requisite, incidental, useful, or conducive to, and
it is the true one in which it is to be understood
as used in the constitution. The whole turn of the
clause containing it indicates that it was the intent of
the convention, by that clause, to give a liberal latitude
to the exercise of the specified powers. The expres
sions have a peculiar comprehensiveness. They are:
"To make all laws necessary and proper for carrying
into execution the foregoing powers, and all other
powers vested by the constitution In the government of
the United States, or in any department or oflJce ,
thereof." To understand the word as the Secretary of
State does would be to depart from its obvious and
popular sense and to give it a restrictive operation, an
Idea never before entertained. It would be to give it
the same force as if the word absolutely or indispensa
bly had been prefixed to it.
[It is] no valid objection to the doctrine to say that
it is calculated to extend the powers of the government
throughout the entire sphere of state legislation. The
same thing has been said, and may be said with regard
to every exercise of power, by implication or construc
tion. The moment the literal meaning is departed from
there is a chance ol error and abuse; and yet an adher
ence to the letter of its powers would at once arrest the
motion of government. It is not only agreed on all
hands that the exercise of constructive powers is indis
pensable, but every act which has been passed Is more
«>r less an exemplification of it. .
That which declares the power of the President to
remove officers at pleasure acknowledges the same
truth. It leaves, therefore, a criterion of what Is constitu-

104 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
tlonal and of what is not so. This criterion is the end
to which the measure relates as a mean. If the end be
clearly comprehended within any of the specified
powers, and if the measure have an obvious relation to
that end and is not forbidden by any particular pro
vision of the constitution, it may safely be deemed to
come within the compass of, the national authority.
There is also this further criterion, which may ma
terially assist the decision. Does the proposed meas
ure abridge a pre-existing right of any state or of any
individual? If it does not, there is a strong presump
tion in favour of its constitutionality; and slighter
relations to any declared object of the constitution may
be permitted to turn the scale. — Works of Alexander
Hamilton, vol. I, pp. 112-123.
Madison was in the House at this time, and
had at first been the spokesman of the adminis
tration. On this question of the bank he sepa
rated himself entirely from Hamilton, with
whom he had so long worked, and became the
leader, with Jeilerson, of the newly forming
Republican party. In Congress he said :
After some general remarks on the limitations of all
political power, he took notice of the peculiar manner
in which the Federal Government is limited. It is not
a general grant, out of which particular powers are
excepted; it is a grant of particular powers only, leav
ing the general mass in other hands. So it had been
understood by its friends and its foes, and so it was
to be interpreted.
The essential characteristic ol the Government, as
composed of limited and enumerated powers, would be
destroyed if, instead of direct and incidental means
any means could be used, which, in the language of
the preamble to the bill, "might be conceived to be con
ducive to the successful conducting of the finances,
or might be conceived to tend to give facility to the
obtaining of loans.
The Doctrine of implication is always a tender one.
The danger of it has been felt in other Govern
ments. The delicacy was felt in the adoption of our own;

GROWTH OF NATIONALITY. 105
the danger may also be felt if we do not keep close to
our chartered authorities.
Mark the reasoning on which the validity ol the bill
depends! To borrow money is made the end, and the
accumulation of capital implied as the means. The
accumulation of capital is then the end, and a bank
'implied as the means. The bank is then the end, and
a charter of incorporation, a monopoly, capital punish
ments, etc., implied as the means.!
If implications thus remote and multiplied can be
linked together, a chain may be formed that will reach
every object of legislation, every object within the
whole compass of political economy.
The latitude of interpretation required by the bill is
condemned by the rule furnished by the constitution
itself. The danger ol implied power does not arise from its
assuming a new principle; we have not only practiced
it often, but we can scarcely proceed without it; nor
does the danger proceed so much from the extent of
power as from its uncertainty.— BeJitora, Debates, vol. I,
pp. 275, 276.
Fisher Ames.
The doctrine that powers may be implied which are
not expressly vested in Congress has long been a bug
bear to a great many worthy persons. They appre
hend that Congress, by putting constructions upon the
constitution, will govern by its own arbitrary discre
tion; and therefore that it ought to be bound to
exercise the powers expressly given, and those only.
If Congress may not make laws conformably to the
powers plainly implied, though not expressed in the
frame of Government, it is rather late In the day to
adopt it as a principle of conduct. A great part of our
two years' labor is lost, and worse than lost to the
public, for we have scarcely made a law in which we
have not exercised our discretion with regard to the
true intent of the constitution. — lb., p. 279.
The question of the constitutionality of the
bank came before the Supreme Court in 1819,
in McCulloch vs. Maryland. Chief Justice Mar
shall wrote the opinion in the case, and held to
the doctrine of implied powers. In this case

106 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
again the idea of nationality was affirmed. In
part he said:
Prom these conventions the Constitution derives its
whole authority. The government proceeds directly
from the people; is "ordained and established" in the
name of the people; and is declared to be ordained "in
order to form a more perfect union, establish justice,
insure domestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of
liberty to themselves and to their posterity." The
assent ol the States, in their sovereign capacity, is im
plied in calling a convention, and thus submitting that
instrument to the people. But the people were at per
fect liberty to accept or reject it; and their act was
final. It required not the affirmance, and could not be
negatived by the State governments. The Constitu
tion, when thus adopted, was of complete obligation,
and bound the State sovereignties.
This government is acknowledged by all to be one of
enumerated powers. The principle, that it can exercise
only the powers granted to it, would seem too apparent
to have required to be enforced by all those arguments
which its enlightened friends, while it was depending
before the people, found it necessary to urge. That
principle is now universally admitted. But the question
respecting the extent of the powers actually granted is
perpetually arising, and will probably continue to arise
as long as our system shall exist.
Among the enumerated powers we do not find that
of establishing a bank or creating a corporation. But
there is no phrase in the instrument which, like the
Articles of Confederation, excludes incidental or im
plied powers; and which requires that everything
granted shall be expressly and minutely described.
Although, among the enumerated powers of govern
ment, we do not find the word "bank" or "incorpora
tion," we find the great powers to lay and collect
taxes; to borrow money; to regulate commerce; to
declare and conduct a war; and to raise and support
armies and navies.
But it may, with great reason, be contended that a
government intrusted with such ample powers, on the

GROWTH OF NATlOlNALiiT. 107
jiue execution of which the happiness and prosperity of
the nation so vitally depends, must also be Intrusted
with ample means for their execution.
Is that construction of the Constitution to be pre
ferred which would render these operations difficult,
hazardous, and expensive? Can we adopt that con
struction . . . which would impute to the framers
of that instrument, when granting these powers for the
public good, the intention of impeding their exercise by
withholding a choice of means? If, indeed, such be
the mandate of the Constitution, we have only to obey;
but that instrument does not profess to enumerate the
means by 'which the powers it confers may be exe
cuted; nor does it prohibit the creation of a corpora
tion 11 the existence of such a being be essential to the
beneficial exercise of those powers. It is, then, the
subject of fair inquiry how far such means may be em
ployed. But the Constitution ol the United States has not
lelt the right of congress to employ the necessary
means for the execution of the powers conferred on
the government to general reasoning. To its enumera
tion of powers is added that of making "all laws which
shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execu
tion the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested
by this constitution, in the government of the United
States, or in any department thereof."
Congress is not empowered by it to make all laws
which may have relation to the powers conferred on
the government, but such only as may be "necessary
and proper" for carrying them Into execution. The
word "necessary" is considered as controlling the
whole sentence, and as limiting the right to pass laws
for the execution of the granted powers to such as are
indispensable, and without which the power would be
nugatory. Is It true that this is the sense in which the word
"necessary" is always used?
To employ the means necessary to an end is gen
erally understood as employing any means calculated
to produce the end, and not as being confined to those

108 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
single means without which the end would be entirely
unattainable. A thing may be necessary, very necessary, absolutely
or indispensably necessary.
If the word "necessary" means "needful," "requisite,"
"essential," "conducive to" in order to let in the power
of punishment for the infraction of law, why is it not
equally comprehensive when required to authorize the
use of means which facilitate the execution of the
powers of government without the infliction of punish
ment? . That any means adapted to the end; any
means which tended directly to the execution of the
constitutional powers of the government, were in them
selves constitutional.
Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope
of the Constitution, and all means which are appro
priate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which
are not prohibited, but consist with the letter and
spirit ol the constitution, are constitutional. — Thayer,
Cases in Constitutional Law, vol. I, pp. 274-285.
QUESTIONS.
1. When was the present constitution formed? 2. Is
it expressed in general or specific terms? 3. Who in
terprets the constitution? 4. Who interprets it finally?
5. What do you understand by "implied powers"? 6.
Could there be any implied powers under the Articles
of Confederation? 7. Over what question did the dis
cussion of the "implied powers" first arise? 8. Sum
marize Jefferson's argument. 9. Can you give any
example to illustrate his first sentence? 10. What did
he believe "necessary" meant? 11. What principle
does Hamilton start out with? 12. What three kinds
of powers does he name? 13. What meanings does he
give to "necessary"? 14. What means does he claim
may be used when the right to the end is admitted?
15. Summarize Madison's arguments. 16. Compare
arguments of the three men. 17. Give Fisher Ames'
argument. 18. Make an outline of the arguments of
John Marshall. 19. Of all their arguments, which do
you consider the greatest? Why? 20. Was it impor
tant to have the doctrine of implied powers prevail?
Why? SOVEREIGNTY. IN NATION OR STATE?
Perhaps the first formal statement of that

GROWTH OF NATIONALITT. 109
Interpretation of the Constitution which af
firmed the right of the state to be the final judge
of its powers was given in the Kentucky Eeso-
lutions of 1798. Indirectly out of these resolu
tions came nullification and secession. Whether
this succession was legitimate or not is an open
question, but the parentage, as far as use is
concerned, is undoubted. The important re
solve read as follows :
1. Resolved, That the several states composing the
United States of America are not united on the princi
ple of unlimitsd submission to their general govern
ment, but thLt by compact under the style and title ol
a Constitution of the United States, and of amendments.
thereto, they constituted a general government for
special purposes, delegated to that government certain
definite powers, reserving, each state to itself, the re
siduary mass of right to their own self-government;
and that whensoever the general government assumes
undelegate powers its acts are unauthoritative, void,
and of no force.
To this resolution several states answered
that the final judge of the powers of the federal
government rested in the Supreme Court. The
legislature of Kentucky replied in 1799 in these
words, in part :
Resolved, That this commonwealth consider the Fed
eral Union, upon the terms and for the purposes speci
fied in the late compact, as conducive to the liberty and
happiness of the several states; That it does now un
equivocally declare its attachment to the Union, and
to that compact, agreeably to its obvious and real in
tention, and will be among the last to seek its dissolu
tion; That if those who administer the general gov
ernment be permitted to transgress the limits fixed by
that compact, by a total disregard to the special delega
tions of power therein contained, an annihilation of
the.' state governments and the creation upon their
ruins of a general consolidated government will be the
inevitable consequence; That the principle and con
struction contended for by sundry of -the state legisla
tures, that the general government is the exclusive

110 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Judge of the extent ol the powers delegated to It, stop
nothing short ol despotism, — since the discretion of
those who administer the government, and not the
constitution, would be the measure of their powers.
. . That this commonwealth does, under the most
deliberate reconsideration, declare the said alien and
sedition laws are, in their opinion, palpable violations
of the said Constitution. That, although this
commonwealth, as a party to the federal compact, will
bow to the laws of the Union, yet it does at the same
time declare that it will not now, or ever hereafter,
cease to oppose in a constitutional manner every at
tempt, at what quarter soever offered, to violate that
compact. . . — Cited in Cluskey, Political Text-Book.
James Wilson, in the Pennsylvania ratifying
convention, in 1787, outlined his opinion in re
gard to the nature of the Constitution in these
words. This description may be contrasted
with the preceding:
The very manner of introducing this Constitution, by
the recognition of the authority of the people, is said
to change the principle of the present Confederation
and to introduce a consolidating and absorbing govern
ment. .
In this confederated republic, the sovereignty of the
states, it is said, is not preserved. We are told that
there cannot be two sovereign powers, and that a sub
ordinate sovereignty is no sovereignty.
It has not been, nor, I presume, will it be, denied
that somewhere there is, and of necessity must be, a
supreme, absolute, and uncontrollable authority.
His [Mr. Findley's] position is that the supreme
power resides in the states, as governments; and mine
is that it resides in the people, as the foundation of gov
ernment; that the people have not — that the people
meant not — and that the people ought not, to part with
it, to any government whatsoever. — Cited in Foster on
the Constitution, pp. IO4-IO6.
I consider the people of the United States as form
ing one great community; and I consider the people of
the different States as forming communitiesj again,

GROWTH OF NATIONALITY. Ill
on a lesser scale. From this great division of the
people into distinct communities, it will be found neces
sary that different proportions ol legislative power
should be given to the government, according to the
nature, number, and magnitude of their objects.
Whosoever considers, in a combined and comprehen
sive view, the general texture of the Constitution, will
be satisfied that the people of the United States in
tended to form themselves into a nation for national
purposes. They instituted for such purposes' a national
government, complete in all its parts, with powers
legislative, executive, and judiciary, and in all those
powers extending over the whole nation. — lb., 107-109.
Rawle, in his introduction to Blackstone, uses
the following phrase. He wrote in 1825 :
"The secession of a State from the Union depends on
the will of the people of such a State. The people
alone, as we have already seen, hold the power to alter
their constitution." — Cited in Foster, p. 113.
The Massachusetts legislature (Federal), in
discussing the annexation of Louisiana, 1803,
indicated very clearly its views of the nature of
the Constitution.
That the annexation of Louisiana to the Union
transcends the constitutional power of the govern
ment of the United States. It forms a new Confeder
acy, to which the States united by the former compact
are not bound to adhere. — lb., p. 116.
A most elaborate discussion of the nature of
the Constitution took place over the admission
of Louisiana. Josiah Quincy, the leader of the
Federalists, discussed the subject fully. Ex
tensive extracts are given from his speech, as it
sets forth the views of his party at that time
most ably and completely.
But, sir, the principle of this bill materially affects
the liberties and rights ol the whole people-ol the
United States. To me it appears that it would justily
a revolution in this country, and that, in no great
length ol time, it may produce- it. When I see the

112 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
zeal and perseverance with which this bill has been
urged along its parliamentary path, when I know the
local interests and associated projects which combine
to promote its success, all opposition to it seems mani
festly unavailing. I am almost tempted to leave, with
out a struggle, my country to its fate.
If there be a man in this House, or nation, who
cherishes the Constitution, I fall not behind
him in such sentiments. I will yield to no man in
attachment to this Constitution, in veneration for the
sages who laid its foundations, in devotion for those
principles which form its cement and constitute its
proportions. What, then, must be my feelings; what
ought to be the feelings of a man, cherishing such sen
timents, when he sees an act contemplated which lays
ruin at the foot of all these hopes.
Mr. Speaker, there is a great rule of human conduct
which he who honestly observes can not err widely
from the path of his sought duty. It is, to be very
scrupulous concerning the principles you select as the
test of your rights and obligations; to be very faith
ful in noticing the result of their application; and to
be very fearless in tracing and exposing their immedi
ate effects and distant consequences. Under the sanc
tion of this rule of conduct, I am compelled to declare
it as my deliberate opinion that, if this bill passes, the
bonds of this union are, virtually, dissolved; that the
States which compose it are free from their moral obliga
tions, and that, as it will be the right of all, so it will be
the duty of some, to prepare, definitely, for a separation:
amicably, if they can; violently, if they must.
The bill which is now proposed to be passed has
this assumed principle for its basis: that the three
branches of this national government, without recur
rence to conventions of the people in the States, or to
the Legislatures of the States, are authorized to admit
new partners to a share of the political power, in
countries out of the original limits of the United
States. Now, this assumed principle, I maintain to
be altogether without any sanction in the Constitution.
I declare it to be a manifest and atrocious usurpation
of power; of a nature dissolving, according to undeni
able principles of moral law, the obligations of our

GROWTH OF NATIONALITY. > 113
national compact, and leading to the awful conse
quences which flow from such a state of things.
Touching the general nature of the instrument called
the Constitution of the United States there is no ob
scurity; There can be no doubt about its
nature. It Is a political compact. .
It is, we the people of the United States, for our
selves and our posterity; not for the people of Louis
iana; nor for the people of New Orleans, or of Canada.
None of these enter into the scope of the instrument;
it embraces only "the United States of America."
Sir, what is this power we propose now to usurp?
Nothing less than a power changing all the propor
tions of the weight and influence possessed by the
potent sovereignties composing this Union. A stranger
is to be Introduced to an equal share without their
consent. Upon a principle pretended to be deduced
from the Constitution, this government, alter this bill
passes, may and will multiply loreign partners in
power at its own mere notion; at its irresponsible
pleasure; in other words, as local interests, party pas
sions, or ambitious views may suggest.
"But," the gentleman adds, "what shall we do 11 we
do not admit the people ol Louisiana into our Union?
Our children are settling that country." Sir, it is no
concern ol mine what he does.
This Constitution never was, and never can be,
strained to lap over all the wilderness of the West
without essentially affecting both the rights and con
venience of its real proprietors.
Suppose, then, that it had been distinctly foreseen
that, in addition to the effect of this weight, the whole
population of a world beyond the Mississippi was to
be brought into this and the other branch of the
Legislature, to form our laws, control our rights, and
decide our destiny. Sir, can it be pretended that the
patriots of that day would for one moment have
listened to it? They were not madmen. They had not
taken degrees at the hospital of idiocy.
It was not for these men [people of Louisiana] that
our fathers fought. It was not for them that this
Constitution was adopted. You have no authority to
throw the rights and liberties and properties of this
people into the "hotch-pot" with the wild men of the
Missouri, nor with the mixed, though more respects-

114 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
ble race of Anglo-Hlspano-Gallo-Americans who bask
on the sands in the mouth of the Mississippi. I will
add only a few words, in relation to the moral and
political consequences ol usurping this power. I have
said that it would be a virtual dissolution ol the
Union; and gentlemen express great sensibility at the
expression. But the true source of terror is not the
declaration I have made, but the deed you propose.
New States are intended to be formed beyond the
Mississippi. There is no limit to men's imaginations
on this subject, short ol California and the Columbia
River. The extension of this principle to the States con
templated beyond the Mississippi cannot, will not, and
ought not to be borne. — American Orations, vol. I, pp.
180-202. The New England states spoke in these words
in the Hartford convention of 1814:
In cases of deliberate, dangerous, and palpable in
fractions of the Constitution, affecting the sovereignty
of a State and liberties of the people, it Is not only the
right, but the duty, ol such a State to interpose its
authority lor their protection, in the manner best cal
culated to secure that end. When emergencies occur
which are either beyond the reach ol the judicial
tribunals, or too pressing to admit ol the delay inci
dent to their lorms. States which have no common
umpire must be their own judges, and execute their
own decisions. It will thus be proper for the several
States to await the ultimate disposal of the obnoxious
measures recommended by the Secretary of War, or
pending before Congress, and so to use their power
according to the character these measures shall finally
assume, as effectually to protect their own sovereignty
and the rights and liberties of their citizens. — Cited in
Foster on the Constitution, vol. I, pp. 117, 118.
As late as 1844 and 1845 we find the legis
lature of Massachusetts using these phrases:
That the project ol annexation ol Texas, unless ar-
resjted on the threshold, may drive these States into a
dissolution ol the Vnion.— Foster, p. 118.
As the powers ol legislation granted in the Constitu
tion ol the United States to Congress do not embrace

GROWTH OF NATIONALITY. 115
the case ol the admission ol a foreign state, or foreign
territory, by legislation, into the Union, such an act of
admission would have no binding force whatever on
the people of Massachusetts. — lb., p. 118.
The legislature of Wisconsin (Republican)
passed the following in 1859 :
Whereas, The Supreme Court ol the United States has
assumed appellate jurisdiction in the petition ol Sher
man M. Booth for a writ of habeas corpus presented and
prosecuted to a final judgment in the Supreme Court ol
this State, and . assumed the power to reverse
that judgment in a matter involving the personal liberty
of the citizen. . .
Resolved, That this assumption . Is an act ol
undelegated power, and therefore without authority,
void, and ol no force.
Resolved, That the [national] Government .
was not made exclusive or final judge of the extent of
the powers delegated to itself, but that . each
[state] has an equal right to judge for itself, as well
of infractions as the mode and measure ol redress.
Resolved, That the principle . . that the gen
eral Government is the exclusive judge of the extent of
the powers delegated to it, stop nothing short ol des
potism; since the discretion of those who administer
the Government, and not the Constitution, would be the
measure of their powers; that the several States which
formed that instrument, being sovereign and independ
ent, have the unquestionable right to judge of Its infrac
tions; and that a positive defiance of those sovereign
ties of all unauthorized acts done under color of that
instrument is the rightful remedy. — Cited in Tyler's Life
of Taney, p. 307.
But let us listen to Lincoln to hear what he
has to say on this interesting subject. These
extracts are from his inaugural, and from his
first annual message:
I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of
the Constitution the union ol these States is perpetaial.
Perpetuity is implied, il not expressed, in the funda
mental law ol all national Governments.
Again, il the United States be not a government
proper, but an association of States in the nature ol

lit) AMBKICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
contract merely, can it, as a contract, be peaceably
unmade by less than all parties who make it? One
party to a contract may violate it, break it, so to
speak; but does it not require all to lawfully re
scind it? no State upon its own mere motion can law
fully get out of the Union; that resolves and ordi
nances to that effect are legally void; and that acts of
violence within any State or States, against the author
ity of the United States, are insurrectionary or revolu
tionary, according to circumstances.
I therefore consider that in view of the Constitution
and the laws, the Union is unbroken; , and to the ex
tent of my ability I shall take care, as the Constitu
tion itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of
the Union be faithfully executed in all the States.
And this issue embraces more than the fate of the
United States. It represents to the whole family ol man
the question whether a constitutional republic or democ
racy — a government of the people by the same people —
can or cannot maintain its territorial integrity against
its own domestic foes.
"Is there in all republics this inherent and fatal
weakness?" Must a government of necessity be too
strong for the liberties of its own people, or too weak
to maintain its own existence?
It might seem, at first thought, to be of little differ
ence whether the present movement at the South he
called "secession" or "rebellion." The movers, how
ever, well understand the difference. At the beginning
they knew they could never raise their treason to any
respectable magnitude by any name which implies
violation of law.
They invented an ingenious sophism which, if con
ceded, was followed by perfectly logical steps, through
all the incidents, to the complete destruction of the
Union. The sophism itself is that any state of the
Union may, consistently with the national constitution,
and therefore lawfully and peacefully, withdraw from
the Union without the consent of the Union or of any
other state. The little disguise that the supposed right
is to be exercised only for just cause, themselves to be
the sole judges of its justice, is too thin to merit any
notice. Having never been States either in substance or in

GROWTH OF NATIONALITY. 117
name outside of the Union whence this magical om
nipotence of "State Rights," asserting a claim of power
to lawfully destroy the Union itself? Much is said
about the "sovereignty" of the States; but the word,
even, is not in the National Constitution, nor, as is
believed, in any of the State constitutions. What is
"sovereignty" in the political sense ol the term?
Would it be far wrong to define it "a political com
munity without a political superior?" Tested by this,
no one of our States, except Texas, ever was a "sov
ereignty." By conquest or purchase the Union gave each ol
them whatever ol independence or liberty it has. The
Union is older than any ol the States, and, in lact, it
created them as States. Originally some dependent
colonies made the Union, and in turn, the Union threw
off their old independence lor them, and made them
States, such as they are.
What is now combated is the position that secession
is consistent with the Constitution, — is lawful and
peaceful. It is not contended that there is any express
law for it; and nothing should ever be implied as law
which leads to unjust or absurd consequences.
The seceders insist that our Constitution admits ol
secession. The principle itself is one of disintegration, and
upon which no government can possibly endure. —
Abraham Lincoln, Works, vol. II, pp. 3-63.
In 1867, Chief Justice Chase, speaking for the
Supreme Court in the case of Texas vs. White,
formulated this famous description of the Con
stitution of the United States:
The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an
indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States.
• QUESTIONS.
1. What two views have been held in regard to the
location of sovereignty? 2. What do you understand
by sovereignty? 3. What doctrine set forth in the
Kentucky resolutions? 4. What law did Kentucky
hold unconstitutional? 5. How did they regard isuch
a law? 6. Find out who drafted these resolutions.
7. Could the author of the Kentucky resolutions have
'cited James Wilson to support his views? 8. How
did Mr. Rawle regard the Constitution? 9. Was Mas-

118 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
sacnaselts, from 1803 to 1814, national or States
Rights? 10. Find out the reason for its position. 11.
Make an analysis of the arguments Of Mr. Quincy.
12. Find out why he was so opposed to the West. 13.
How would his views and those of Jefferson Davis in
1861 agree? 14. What did he mean by a "political com
pact"? 15. Was he narrow or broad minded? 16.
Was he a good speaker? 17. Point out strong pas
sages. 18. What view did the Hartford convention
take? 19. Learn all you can of this convention. 20.
Point out all the passages you can find that show a
states right doctrine. 21. Gather all the passages
which prove the national idea. 22. How do you ex
plain the fact that men could differ so greatly? 23.
Could both have been honest in their beliefs? 24. The
position of what party surprises you most? 25. Out
line Lincoln's arguments. 26. Does he agree with the
Wisconsin republicans of 1859? 27. Can you find out
the reason for the change? 28. Commit to memory
Chase's definition of the Union. 29. Has this study
made you any more tolerant than you were before?
30. Write an essay on the doctrine of "implied powers."
31. Write one on the contest between "states rights"
and "nationality." ACQUISITION OF TERRITORY.
Some additional light is thrown on the nature
of the Constitution by adding the opinions of a
few other men in regard to the right to acquire
territory. Jefferson, in 1803, said, in speaking
of the Louisiana purchase:
This treaty must, of course, be laid before both
Houses, because both have important functions to ex
ercise respecting it. They, I presume, .will see their
duty to their country in ratifying and paying for it,
so as to secure a good which would otherwise probably
be never again in their power. But I suppose they
must then appeal to the nation for an additional arti
cle to the Constitution, approving and confirming an
act which the nation had not previously authorized.
The Constitution has made no provision for our hold
ing foreign territory, still less for incorporating foreign
nations into our Union. The executive, in seizing the
fugitive occurrence, which so much advances the good
of our country, has done an act beyond the Constitu
tion. The legislature, in casting behind them metar
physical subtleties and risking themselves like faith
ful servant*, must ratify and pay for it, and thro'w

GROWTH OP NATIONALITY. 119
themselves on their country for doing for them unau
thorized what we know they would have done for them
selves had they been in a situation to do it. It is the
case of a guardian, investing the money of his ward
in purchasing an important adjacent territory; and
saying to him when of age, I did this for your good;
I pretend to no right to bind you; you may disavow
me, and I must get out of the scrape if I can; I
thought it my duty to risk myself for you. But we
shall not be disavowed by the nation, and their act of
indemnity will confirm and not weaken the Constitu
tion, by more strongly marked lines.
Our confederation is certainly confined to the limits
established by the revolution. The general govern
ment has no powers but such as the Constitution has
given it; and it has not given it a power of holding
foreign territory, and still less ol incorporating it into
the Union. An amendment of the Constitution seems
necessary for this. In the meantime we must ratify
and pay our money, as we have treated, for a thing
beyond the Constitution, and rely on the nation to
sanction an act done for its great good, without its
previous authority. — Thomas Jefferson, Writings (ed.
1895), vol. nil, pp. 262, 512.
Webster, about 1830, speaks in these words:
It was consistent with the Constitution of the United
States, or thought to be so in Mr. Jefferson's time, to
attach Louisiana to the United States. A treaty with
France was made for that purpose. Mr. Jefferson's
opinion at that moment was, that an alteration of the
Constitution was necessary to enable it to be done. In
consequence ol considerations to which I need not now
refer, that opinion was abandoned, and Louisiana was
admitted by law, without any provision in, or altera
tion of, the Constitution. My opinion remains un
changed, that it was not within the original scope or
design of the Constitution to admit new States out of
foreign country. — Webster, Works, vol. II, p. 551.
QUESTIONS.
1. How did Je;fferson feel in regard to right to buy
Louisiana? 2. Why, then, did he make the purchase?
3. Would you expect Webster to take the same view?
4. How do we regard the right now? 5. How explain
the change?

ARISTOCRACY VS. DEMOCRACY.
The aristocratic tendencies of a part of the
American people at the close of the last century
is well illustrated by the following extracts from
Fisher Ames, the most eloquent of the Federal
ists. A few quotations from Jefferson to show
the opposite belief must close this paper.
All such men are, or ought to be, agreed, that simple
governments are despotisms, and of all despotisms a
democracy, though the least durable, is the most vio
lent. The known propensity of a democracy is to licen
tiousness, which the ambitious call, and the ignorant
believe, to be liberty.
The great object, then, of political wisdom in fram
ing our Constitution was to guard against licentious
ness, that inbred malady of democracies, that deforms
their infancy with gray hairs and decrepitude.
The Press, however, has left the understanding of
the mass of men just where it found it; but, by sup
plying an endless stimulus to their imagination and
passions, it has rendered their temper and habits in
finitely worse, it has inspired ignorance with presump
tion, so that those who cannot be governed by reason
are no longer awed by authority.
While it has impaired the force that every just gov
ernment can employ in sell-defence, it has imparted
to its enemies the result of that wildfire, that blazes
with the most consuming fierceness on attempting to
quench it.
It is undoubtedly a salutary labour to diffuse among
the citizens of a free state, as far as the thing is pos
sible, a just knowledge of their publick affairs. But
the difficulty of this task is augmented exactly in pro
portion to the freedom of the state; for the more the
citizens, the bolder and more profligate will be their
demagogues, the more numerous and eccentrick the
popular errours, and the more vehement and pertina
cious the passions that defend them.
Yet, as il there were neither vice nor passion in the
world, one ol the loudest of our boasts, one of the dear
est of all the tenets of our creed is, that we are a sov
ereign people— self -governed,— it would be nearer the

GROWTH UF iMAXiuwauiTY. 121
truth to say, self-conceited. For in what sense is it
true, that any people, however free, are self-governed?
If they have in fact no government, but such as com
ports with their ever varying and often inordinate de
sires, then it is anarchy; if it counteracts those desires,
it is compulsory. The individual who is left to act
according to his own humour is not governed at all;
and if any considerable number, and especially any
combination of individuals, find or can place them
selves in this situation, then the society is no longer
free. For liberty obviously consists in the salutary
restraint, and not In the uncontrolled indulgence of
such humours.
The republick is a creature of fiction; it is every
body in fancy, but nobody in heart. Love, to be any
thing, must be select and exclusive.
A state consisting of a million citizens has a million
sovereigns, each ol whom detests all other sovereigns
but his own.
Are not the wandering Tartars or Indian hunters at
least as susceptible of patriotism as these stragglers
in our Western forests, and infinitely fonder ol glory?
It is difficult to conceive ol a country which, Irom the
manner ol its settlement or the manifest tendencies ol
its politicks, is more destitute or more incapable ol
being inspired with political virtue.
Its nature ordains that its next change shall be Into
a military despotism, of all known governments, per
haps, the most prone to shift its head, and the slowest
to mend its vices. The reason is that the tyranny ol
what is called the people, and that by the sword, both
operate alike to debase and corrupt, till there are
neither men left with the spirit to desire liberty, nor
morals with the power to sustain justice. Like the
burning pestilence that destroys the human body,
nothing can subsist by its dissolution but vermine. —
Fisher Ames, Works, pp. 382-419.
Jefferson speaks as follows:
"The basis of our governments being the opinion of
the people, the very first object should be to keep that
right; and were it left to me to decide whether we
should have a government without newspapers, or
newspapers without a government, I should not hesi
tate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean

122 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
that every man should receive those papers and be
capable of reading them. Among [such socie
ties] public opinion is in the place of law, and restrains
morals as powerfully as law ever did anywhere.
Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people and keep
alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their
errors, but restrain them by enlightening them. If
once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you
and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges, and Gov
ernors, shall all become wolves." — To Edw. Carrington,
Jan. 17, 1787. Works, vol. IV (1853 ed.).
"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a
good thing, and as necessary in the political world as
storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, in
deed, generally establish the encroachments on the
rights of the people which have produced them. An
observation of this truth should render honest repub
lican governors so mild in their punishment of rebel
lions as not to discourage them too much. It is a
medicine necessary for the sound health of govern
ment."— To Madison, Jan. SO, 1787. Works, vol. IV (1856
ed.). QUESTIONS.
1. How does Ames regard the people? 2. What does
he expect to become of democracies? 3. How would
you explain his feeling? 4. Compare his ideas with
those of Jefferson. 5. Did Jefferson fear little insur
rections? 6. Why not? 7. Which expressed the best
doctrines?

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

Volume II. will include the following numbers:
(1) Gallatin, 3) Adams, J. Q., (3) Clay, (4) Webster,
(5) Calhoun, (6) Sumner, ;7) Douglas, (8, Seward, (9)'
Chase, (10) Blaine,
Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents. Ten or more
copies of one number, 4 cents each. Yearly subscrip
tion, 40 cents. Ten or more s,ul3Scription8 to one ad
dress, 80 cents each.

American History Studies

No, 6,

FEBRUARY, 1898.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES
1.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W. CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OP NEBRASKA.

J. H. MILLER, Publisher,
LINCOLN, NEBRASKA.

JTearly Subscription, 40 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

Published Monthly, Except .July and August.
Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office, Lincoln, Nebraska,
U.S. A

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

SLAVEEY IN THE UNITED STATES.
c\^N some respects this has been the most in-
'^ teresting, as, for a time, it was the most
"" important, question in all American his
tory. The great tragedy of the civil war came
from it. For years before that event the people
of the north and those of the south were unable
to understand one another. It may be that they
did not try as hard as they might, yet the en
vironments had become so different from the
existence of sectional slavery that it was very.
difficult for the people to see things from the
same standpoints.
It will not do to suppose the civil war was
wholly due to slavery, yet that it furnished the
main causes I believe history will affirm.
Neither must we suppose that the contest was
the outcome of momentary hatred, nor that one
section can be held wholly responsible for its
terrible devastation. The factors had been in
process of formation for more than two hundred
years. The whole history of the white race on
this continent must be studied to understand
the problem thoroughly. The soil, climate, and
resulting industries played an important part.
Perhaps the most important thought for the
youth of to-day to grasp is that the two sections
were equally honest in their views. History, I
believe, will affirm, nay, has affirmed, that those
who fought for the southern view were wrong,
and that the north, in this case, stood for pro
gress and an advancing civilization. However,
we should recognize that conditions and cir-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 126
cumstances to a great degree determined belief;
we should do justice to the devotion, the sac
rifices, the courage, and the brilliancy with
Which they fought for a mistaken view. It is
now time to cement the bond of union, to look to
the future, to study the past for its lessons^ but
not to taunt nor to condemn.
In a general way we may note, as it seems to
me, about four general periods in this history.
From 1619 to 1774, the period of planting. Dur
ing these years the question was little thought
about. Very few saw the dangers. It was
not a political question at all. It can hardly
be said to have come into the field of ethics, al
though a few here and there began to question
its morality.
Prom 1774 to 1808 there was a marked move
ment to put an end to the system. This force
was strongest under the immediate infiuence of
the Revolution, and had almost entirely passed
away in the south by the end of the period.
During these years the northern states freed
themselves, and thus laid the foundation for
the sectional contest. The almost, if not quite,
unanimous expression of opinion during the
earlier, at least, of these years was that slavery
was an evil which it was hoped might pass
away. The third period extended from 1808 to 1844,
and was marked by a gradual recognition of the
fact that there was no chance for the system to
die out of itself. Gradually there came to be a
recognition that the supposed interests of the
two sections, socially, politically, and indus
trially were opposed. The north was coming to
the view more positively that the whole system
was an evil, and many came to believe it a sin
for which all must answer. On the other hand^
the south ceased to be apologists for its exist
ence, and finally came to believe almost as one
man that it was "a good — a positive good."

126 AMBEiOAN hiStoey STtJbias.
The last period was that of contest. It began
as a political issue, and ended in a physical
struggle such as the world had perhaps uever
seen before. During these years scarcely a fact
in American politics can be mentioned which
was not more or less involved with the auestion
of slavery.
This brief outline is given, not because it is
strictly in accordance with the laboratory
method, but because in the brief extracts which
J can give not enough matter can be presented
to suggest the classification. A study of the
following extracts may give something of a
chance to test the truth of the conclusions, but
they will hardly be full enough to establish their
correctness. The following extracts from the early laws of
the colonies will give us some idea of the state
of mind which must have been back of the laws:
[1652.] And itt is further ordered by this Courte and
the authoritje thereof, that all Scotchmen, Negroes,
and Indjans inhabitting with or servants to the Eng
lish, from the age of sixteene to sixty yeares, shall be
enlisted. . — Records of the Colony of Mass. Bay,
vol. IV, part I, p. 86.
[1680.] Wm. Seete, Governor: There are but fewe
servants amongst us, and less slaves, not above 30, as
we judge, in the Colony. — Colonial Records of Connecti
cutt, 1978-1689, p. 298.
[1723.] Be it enacted if any negro or Indian
¦servant or slave shall be found abroad from home in
the night season, after nine of the clock, without
special order from his or their master or mistress, it
shall be lawful for any person or persons to apprehend
and secure such negro or Indian servant or slave so
offending, and him or. them bring before the next
assistant or justice of peace. — Ibid, 1717-1725, p. 390.
[1681. Proposals for the carrying on of the Negroe's
Christianity.] Now concerning the Negroe's,
The first and great step will be to procure
their Owners consent, as being supposed to be averse
thereto: not altogether, as is here believed, out of

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 127
Interest . . . ; but by reason of the trouble, and
the fancied needlessness of the Work; and to prevent
all danger from their slaves being furnlshf with
knowledge, consequent, they conceive thereto.^^flor*,
American History Told by Contemporaries, vol. I, p. 299.
. Be it hereby further Declared and Enacted,
by and with the Authority, Advice, and Consent afore
said. That no Negro or Negroes, by receiving the Holy
Sacrament of Baptism, is thereby manumitted or set
free, nor hath any Right or Title to Freedom or Manu
mission, more than he or they had before; any Law,
Usage, or Custom to the contrary notwithstanding. —
Hening's Statutes of Virginia, 1715, ch. 4-i, sec. 3.^.
Be it further Enacted, . That for every Negro
Imported Into this Province, either by Land or
Water, the Importer or Importers of such Negro or
Negroes shall pay unto the said Naval Officer afore
said, the Sum of Twenty Shillings Sterling per Poll
. . .—Ibid, 1715, ch. 36, sec. 8.
Be it therefore Enacted, . , That from and
after the End of this present Session of Assembly, No
Negro, or Mulatto Slave, Free Negro, or Mulatto bom
of a White Woman, during his Time of Servitude by
Law, or any Indian Slave, or Free Indian Natives of
this , or the neighboring Provinces, be admitted and
received as good and valid Evidence in Law, in any
Matter or Thing whatsoever, . , wherein any
Christian White Person is concerned. — Ibid, 1717, ch.
13, sec. 2.
[1765.] Be it Enacted, . . , That the Justices of
the several and respective County Courts within this
Province, be, and they are hereby impowered and re
quired, , to appoint the Constable of every
Hundred, where the said Justices, at their Discretion,
shall think proper and expedient, to suppress the As
sembling and tumultuous Meeting of Negroes and other
Slaves; . — Eening, Statutes of Virginia.
[1725.J XL And be It enacted by the Authority
aforesaid. That no Master or Mistress of any Negroe
shall hereafter, for any Reward, Sum or Sums of
Money, stipulated and agreed upon betwixt them, or
upon any Pretence whatsoever, permit or suffer his or
their Negroes to ramble about, under Pretence of get
ting Work, nor give Liberty to their Negroes to seek

128 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
their own Employ, and so go to work at their own
Wills, under the Penalty of Twenty Shillings tor every
such Offence. — Acts of Pennsylvania.
[1792.] V. No negro or mulatto shall be a witness,
except in pleas of the Commonwealth against negroes
or mulattoes, or In civil pleas, where negroes or mulat-
toes alone shall be parties.
VI. No slave shall go from the tenements of his mas
ter or other person with whom he lives, without a pass,
or some letter or token, whereby it may appear that he
is proceeding by authority from his master, employer,
or overseer.
XL Riots, routs, unlawful assemblies, trespasses and
seditious speeches by a slave or slaves, shall be pun
ished by stripes . — Acts of the General Assembly of
Pennsylvania, Printed by A. Davis, 1794, PP- 196, 197.
[1793.] II. Be It enacted by the General Assembly,
That from and after the passing of this act, every free
negro or mulatto, who resides In, or is employed to
labour within the limits of any city, borough, or town,
shall be registered and numbered In a book to be kept
for that purpose by the clerk of the said city, borough,
or town, which register shall specify his or her age,
name, colour and stature, by whom, and in what court
the said negro or mulatto was emancipated, or that
such negro or mulatto was born free. — Ibid, p. 327.
[1687, New York.] This I ohserve that they
take no care of the conversion of their Slaves. — Hart,
vol. I, p. 54s.
[1650, New York.] There are, also, various other
negroes In this country, some of whom have been
made free for their long service, but their children have
remained slaves, though it Is contrary to the laws of
every people that anyone born of a Christian mother
should be a slave ^nd be compelled to remain in servi
tude. — Ibid, p. 535.
[Rev. John McDowell said In 1762 concerning North
Carolina]: We have but few families in this parish,
but of the best In the province, viz.. His Excellency the
Governor, His Honor the President, some of the honor
able Council, Col. Dry, the Collector, and about 20
other good families, who have each of them great
gangs of slaves. We have in all about 200 families. —
Cited in J. H. V. Studies. 1896, p. 193.

SLAVEEY IN THE UNITED STATES. 129
Every freeman of Carolina shall have absolute
power and authority over negro slaves of what opin
ion and religion whatsoever. — Ibid, p. 27.
Be it further enacted. That If any master, or owner
of negroes, or slaves, or any other person or persons
whatsoever In the government shall permit or suffer
any negro or negroes to build on their or either of
their lands or any part thereof any house under pre
tense of a meeting house upon account of worship or
upon any pretense whatsoever, and shall not suppress
and hinder them, he, she, or they so offending shall
for every default forfeit or pay fifty pounds, one-half
towards defraying the contingent charges of the gov
ernment, the other to him or them that shall sue for
the same.— Ibid, p. 50.
That there were those during these years who
held different views from those manifested in
these laws may be seen from the following ex
tracts. Jonathan Edwards the younger said:
"To hold a man in a state of slavery, is to be, every
day, guilty of robbing him of his liberty, or of man
stealing." — Cited in Goodell, Slavery and Anti-Slavery,
p. 28.
The town meeting of Danbury, Connecticut,
in 1774, passed the following resolution:
"We cannot but think It a palpable absurdity so
loudly to complain of attempts to Enslave us while we
are actually Enslaving others." — American Archives,
vol. I, p. 1038.
The Friends, in their annual meetings, give
us their views in the following resolutions:
[1696, Advised the members to] be careful not to
encourage the bringing in of any more negroes, and
that those who have negroes be careful of them, bring
them to meetings, have meetings with them In their
families, restrain them from loose and lewd living, as
much as In them lies, and from rambling abroad, on
First days or other times.
[1774.] All members concerned in importing, sell
ing, purchasing, giving or transferring negroes or

130 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES. |(
other slaves, or otherwise acting in such a manner as
to continue them In slaVery beyond the term limited
by law or custom [for whites] was directed to be ex
cluded fr. membership or disowned.
[1776.] It was enacted by the same meeting That
the owners of slaves, who refused to execute proper In
struments for giving them their freedom, were to be
disowned likewise. — Goodell, pp. 35, 36.
In the Virginia convention of 1774 to choose
delegates to the Philadelphia convention, Jeffer
son laid before it an exposition of the rights of
British America. A part was as follows:
The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object
of desire in those colonies where it was unhappily
introduced In their infant state. But previous to the
enfranchisement of the slaves. It is necessary to ex
clude all further importations from Africa; Yet our
repeated attempts to effect this by prohibitions, and
by imposing duties which might amount to a prohibi
tion, have been hitheito defeated by his Majesty's
negative; Thus preferring the immediate advantage
of a few African [British] corsairs, to the lasting in
terests of the American States, and to the rights of
human nature deeply wounded by this infamous prac
tice. — Jefferson, Works, vol. I (Ford), p. 440.
The convention actually
Resolved, We will neither ourselves import nor pur
chase any slave or slaves imported by any other per
son after the 1st day of November next [1774], either
from Africa, the W. Indies, or any other place. — lb., p.
687. The North Carolina Provincial Convention of
the same year
Resolved, That we will not Import any slave or
slaves, or purchase any slave or slaves imported or
brought into the province by others, from any part
of the world after the first day of Nov. next. — 76., p.
735. The first General Congress, in 1774, passed the
following Articles of Association:
We do, for ourselves and the inhabitants of the sey-

i SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 131'
eral Colonies whom we represent, firmly agree and
associate, as follows:
2. We will neither Import nor purchase, any slave
Imported after the first day of December next; after
which time, we will wholly discontinue the slave trade,
and will neither be concerned In it ourselves, nor will
we hire our vessels, nor sell our commodities or manu
factures, to those who are concerned in It.
11. That a committee be chosen In every county,
city, and town, by those who are qualified to vote for
representatives in the legislature, whose business it
shall be attentively to observe the conduct of all per
sons touching this association; and when it shall be
made to appear, to the satisfaction of a majority of
any such committee, that any person within the limits
of their appointment has violated this association, that
such majority do forthwith cause the truth of the case
to be published in the gazette; to the end, that all such
foes to the rights of British-America may be publicly
known and universally contemned as the enemies of
American liberty; and thenceforth we respectively will
break off all dealings with him or her.
14. And we do further agree and resolve that we
will have no trade, commerce, dealings or intercourse
whatsoever, with any colony or province. In N. Amer.,
which shall not accede to or who shall hereafter vio
late this association, but will hold them as unworthy
of the rights of freemen and as inimical to the liber
ties of this country. — Journal of Congress, vol. I, 23 f.
The representatives of the Darien district, in
Georgia, in 1775, resolved:
"To show the world that we are not infiuenced by
any contracted or Interested motives, but a general
philanthropy for all mankind, of whatever climate,
language, or complexion, we hereby declare our dis
approbation and abhorrence of the unnatural practice
of slavery in America (however the uncultivated state
of our country, or other specious arguments may plead
for It,) a practice founded in Injustice and cruelty,
and highly dangerous to our liberties (as well as lives.)

132 AMBEIOAN aiSTORY STUDIES.
debasing part of our fellow-creatures below men, and
corrupting the virtue and morals of rest, and is laying
the basis of that liberty we contend for, (and which
we pray the Almighty to continue to the latest pos
terity,) upon a very wrong foundation. We, there
fore. Resolve, at all times to use our utmost endeavors
for the manumission of our slaves in this colony, upon
the most safe and equitable footing for the master and
themselves." — Am. Archives, vol. I, p. 1136.
The Declaration of Independence as originally
drafted contained the following clause:
he has waged cruel w§.r against human nature Itself,
violating it's most sacred lights of life & liberty In the
persons of a distant people who never offended him,
captivating & carrying them into slavery in another
hemisphere, or to incur miserable death In their trans
portation thither, this piratical warfare, the oppro
brium of infidel powers. Is the warfare of the Christian
king of Great Britain determined to keep open a mar
ket where MEN should be bought & sold he has prosti
tuted, his negative for suppressing every legislative
attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable com
merce: and that 1>his assemblage of horrors might
want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting
those very people to rise In arms among us, and to
purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them,
by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded
them: thus paying off former crimes committed
against the liberties of one people, with crimes which
he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
—Jefferson, Works, vol. II (Ford), p. 51, Facsimile.
Jefferson's draft of the Ordinance of 1784 for
the government of the territories of the United
States contained this clause in relation to slav
ery: After the year 1800 of the Christian era there sliall
be neither slavery nor Involuntary Servitude in any
of the said States, otherwise than In punishment of
crimes whereof the party shall have been convicted
to be personally guilty.
The Ordinance of 1787, which provided for the

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 13^
government of the northwest territory, had this
provision in regard to the subject under con
sideration: Art. VI. There shall be neither slavery nor involun
tary servitude In the said territory, otherwise than in
punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have
been duly convicted; . . .
Jbfp^beson, in his "Notes on Virginia,*' ia
1782, discusses the subject as follows:
"There must doubtless be an unhappy infiuence on
the manners of our people produced by the existence
of slavery among us. The whole commerce between
master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most
boisterous passions, the most unremitting despotism,
on the one part, and degrading submissions on the
other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate It;
for man is an imitative animal. . If a parent
could find no motive either In his philanthropy or his
self-love for restraining the intemperance of passion
towards his slave, it should always be a sufficient one
that his child is present. But generally it is not suf
ficient. The parent storms, the child looks on, catches
the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs In the
circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose to the worst of
passions, and thus nursed, educated, and daily ex
ercised in tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it
witti odious peculiarities. The man must be a prodigy
who can retain his manners and morals undepraved
by such circumstances. And with what execration
should the statesman be loaded, who, permitting one-
half of the citizens thus to trample on the rights of
the other, transforms those Into despots, and these
Into enemies, destroys the morals of the one and the
amor patrice of the other! With the morals
of the people their industry also is destroyed.
And can the liberties of a nation be '.bought secure,
when we have removed their only firm basis, a con
viction in the minds of the people that these liberties
are of the gift of God? That they are not to be vio
lated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my
country when I reflect that God is just; that His jus
tice cannot sleep forever; that considering numbers,

134 AMBEIOAN HISTOBY STUDIES. S '
nature, and natural means only, a revolution of the
wheel of Fortune, an exchange of situation, is among
possible events; that it may become probable by
supernatural Interference! The Almighty has no at
tribute which can take side with us in such a contest."
—Works, vol. Ill (Ford), pp. 266-7.
The following letters from Jefferson will show
how he felt in regard to the institution of slav
ery: To De. Price, encouraging him and praising
the spirit of a pamphlet against slavery, 1785 :
Southward of the Chesapeak it will find but few
readers concurring with It In sentiment on the sub
ject of slavery. From the mouth to the head of the
Chesapeak, the bulk of the people will approve it in
theory, and It will find a reputable minority ready to
accept it in practice, a minority which for weight and
worth of character preponderates against the greatest
number, who have not the courage to divest their
families of a property which however keeps their con
science unquiet. Northward of the Chesapeak you
may find here and there an opponent to your doctrine
or you may find here and there a robber and a mur
derer, but in no greater number. In a few
years there will be no slaves Northward of Maryland.
In Maryland I do not find such a disposition to begin
the redress of this enormity as In Virginia. This is
the next state to which we may turn our eyes for the
interesting spectacle of justice in conflict with avarice
and oppression. — Works, vol. IV (Ford), pp. 82-S.
To M. DE Meustibe, January 24, 1786 :
I conjecture there are 650,000 negroes in the 5 South
ernmost states, and not 50,000 In the rest. In most of
these latter effectual measures have been taken for
their future emancipation. In the former, nothing Is
done toward that. The disposition to emancipate them
is strongest In Virginia. Those who desire It, form,
as yet, the minority of the whole state, but it bears a
respectable proportion to the whole in numbers and
weight of character, and Is continually recruiting by
the addition of nearly the whole of the young men
as fast as they come into public life. I flatter myself

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 135
It will take place there at some period of time not very
distant. In Maryland and N. Carolina a very few are
disposed to emancipate. In S. Carolina and Georgia
not the smallest symptoms of it, but, on the contrary
these 2 states and N. Carolina continue Importations
of negroes. — Ibid, pp. 145-6.
To M. DB Meustibr, 1786:
What a stupendous, what an incomprehensible ma
chine! Who can endure toil, famine, stripes, impris
onment and death itself in vindication of his own lib
erty, and the next moment be deaf to all those
motives whose power supported him thro' his trial, and
inflict on his fellow men a bondage, one hour of which
Is fraught with more misery than ages of that which
he rose In rebellion to oppose. But we must await
with patience the workings of an overruling provi
dence. I hope that that is preparing the deliverance
of these, our suffering brethren. When the measure
of their tears shall be full, when their groans shall
have involved heaven itself in darkness, doubtless a .
God of justice will awaken to their distress, and by
diffusing light and liberality among their oppressors,
or at length by his exterminating thunder, manifest
his attention to the things of this world, and that they
are not left to the guidance of a blind fatality." — Ibid,
p. 185.
To St. George Tucker, August 28, 1797,
[subscribes to emancipation], and to the mode of
emancipation, I am satisfied that that must be a mat
ter of compromise between the passions, the preju
dices, and the real difficulties which will each have
their weight in that operation. Perhaps the first chap
ter of this history, which has begun in St. Domingo
may prepare our minds for a peaceable ac
comodation between justice, policy and necessity; and
furnish an answer to the difficult question, whither
shall the colored emigrants go? and the sooner we
put some plan underway, the greater hope there is
that It may be permitted to proceed peaceably to it's
ultimate effect. But if something is not done and soon
done, we shall be the murderers of our own children. —
Ibid, vol. VII, pp. 167-8.

136 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
To Edwaed Coles, 1814:
[His views] have long since been in possession of
the public, and time has only served to give them
stronger proof. The love of justice and the love of
country plead equally the cause of these people, and
it is a mortal reproach to us that they should have
pleaded so long In vain. The hour of emanci
pation is advancing in the march of time. It will come
and whether brought on by the generous energy of
our own minds or by the bloody process of St. Do
mingo is a leaf in our history not yet turned
over. . . I have seen no proposition so expedient,
on the whole, as that of emancipation of those bom
after a given day. This enterprise . .
shall have all my prayers.
Washington speaks in no uncertain words in
regard to his desires and intentions:
To EoBT. Morris, April 12, 1786:
I can only say that there is not a man living who
wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted
for the abolition of it [slavery] ; but there is only one
proper and effectual mode in which It can be accom
plished, and that is by legislative authority; and this,
so far as my suffrage will go, shall never be wanting. —
Works, vol. IX (Sparks), p. 158.
To John F. Mercer, September 9, 1786 :
I never mean, unless some particular circumstances
should compel me to it, to possess another slave by
purchase, it being among my flrst wishes to see some
plan adopted, by which slavery in this country may be
abolished by law. — lb., p. — .
Washington, by his will, freed all his slaves.
William Pinckney, m Maryland House of
Delegates, 1789, says:
Iniquitous and most dishonorable to Maryland, ia
that dreary system of partial bondage which her laws
have hitherto supported with a solicitude worthy of
a better object and her citizens, by their practice,
countenanced. Founded in a disgraceful traffic, to
which the present country lent its fostering aid, from

slavery in THB united STATES. 137
motives of interest, but which even she would have dis
dained to encourage, had England been the destined
mart of such inhuman merchandize, its continuance is
as shameful as its origin. — Elliot's Debates, vol. — , p. — .
John Jay says:
Till America comes into this measure [abolition]
her progress to Heaven will be impious. This is a
strong expression but it Is just. I believe that God
is just, and I believe it to be a maxim in His, as in
other courts, that those who ask equity ought to do it.
—Letter from Spain, 1780, Goodell, p. 30.
THE SLAVE COMPROMISES IN THB CONSTITUTION.
Representatives and direct Taxes shall be appor
tioned among the several States which may be in
cluded within this Union, according to their respective
numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the
whole Number of free Persons, including those bound
to Service for a Term of Years, . . three-fifth
of all other Persons. — The Constitution, art. I, sec. 2,
cl. 3.
On the above article of the Constitution a long
debate took place in the Constitutional Conven
tion. Various opinions in regard to Its merits
were expressed by the members of the conven
tion. The following extracts will well illustrate
the general trend of the debate.
Gbkbt (Mass.): Why should the blacks, who were
property in the South, be in the rule of representation
more than the cattle and horses in the North?
Pinckney (S. C): . . He thought the blacks
ought to stand on an equality with the whites; but
would agree to the ratio settled by Congress.
BuTLEB (S. C.) insisted that the labor of a slave in
South Carolina was as productive and valuable as that
of a free man in Massachusetts; that as wealth was the
great means of defence and utility to the nation, they
were equally valuable to it with freemen; and that
consequently an equal representation ought to be al
lowed for them in a government which was instituted
principally for the protection of property, and was
itself to be supported by property.

138 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Wilson (Pa.) did not well see on what principle the
admission of blacks in the proportion of three-fifths
could be explained. Are they admitted as citizens —
then why not admitted on an equality with white
citizens? Are they admitted as property — then why
not all other property?
Randolph ( Va.) : He urged strenuously that express
security ought to be provided for including slaves In
the ratio of representation. He lamented that such a
species of property existed. But as It did exist, the
holders of it would require this security. It was per
ceived that the design was entertained by some of ex
cluding slaves altogether; the Legislature therefore
ought not to be left at liberty.
Pinckney (S. C.) reminded the committee that if the
convention should fail to insert some security to the
Southern States against an emancipation of slaves,
he should be bound by duty to his state to vote
against their report.
Rogee Sherman (Conn.) did not regard the admis
sion of the negroes into the ratio of representation, as
liable to such insuperable objections. It was the free
men of the Southern States who were. In fact, to be
represented according to the taxes paid by them, and
the negroes are only included in the estimate of the
taxes. . . — The Madison Papers, pp. I4S, 302, 324,
332, 336, 4I8, 480.
The Migration or Importation of such Persons as
any of the States now existing shall think proper to
admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior
to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but
a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation,
not exceeding ten dollars for each Person. — The Con
stitution, art. I, sec. 9, cl. 1.
On this clause again a long debate ensued:
Rutledge (S. C.) : Religion and humanity
had nothing to do with this question. Interest alone is
the governing principle with nations. The true ques
tion at present is, whether the Southern States shall
or shall not be parties to the Union. If the Northern
States consult their interest, they will not oppose the
increase of Slaves, which will increase the commodi
ties of which they will have become the carriers.

SLAVERY IN THB UNITED STATES. 139
Ellsworth (Conn.) was for leaving the clause as it
stands. Let every State import what It pleases. The
morality or wisdom of slavery are considerations be
longing to the States themselves. What enriches a
part enriches the whole, and the States are the best
judges of their particular interests.
Pinckney (S. C): South Carolina can never receive
the plan if it prohibits the slave trade.
Sherman (Conn.): He disapproved of the slave
trade, yet as the States were now possessed of the
right to Import slaves, and as the public good did not
require it to be taken from them he thought
It best to leave the matter as we find it. He observed
that the abolition of slavery seemed to be going on in
the United States, and that the good sense of the sev
eral States would probably by degrees complete It, . .
Mason (Va.): This Infamous traffic originated in
the avarice of British merchants. . The evil of
having slaves was experienced during the late war,
Maryland and Virginia had already prohibited
the importation of slaves. . All this would be
in vain, if South Carolina and Georgia be at liberty to
Import. The Western people are already call
ing out for slaves for their new lands; and will fill
that country with slaves. If they can be got through
South Carolina and Georgia.
Baldwin (Ga.): . Georgia could not give up
this one of her favorite prerogatives. If left to herself
she may probably put a stop to the evil. . .
Williamson (N. C): . He thought the Southern
States could not be members of the Union if the clause
should be rejected.
King (Mass.): If Southern States would not con
federate with the tax on slaves imported, so he thought
Northern would not if this clause were omitted.
Rutledge (S. C): If the convention thinks North
Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia will ever agree
to the plan, unless their right to import be untouched,
the expectation Is vain. The people of those States
will never be such fools as to give up so important an
interest. Madison (Va.): Twenty years will produce all the
mischief that can be apprehended from the liberty to
import slaves. So long a time will be more dishonora-

140 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
ble to the American character than to say nothing
about It in the constitution.
He thought It wrong to admit In the constitution the
idea that there could be property In men. — The Madison
Papers, pp. 577, 578, 581, 582, 608, 610.
A few extracts from speeches made in the
State conventions to consider the adoption of
the constitution throw still more light on the
views prevailing at the time.
Jas. Wilson (Pa.):
I consider this clause as laying the foundation for
banishing slavery out of this country; and though the
period is more distant than I could wish It, it will pro
duce the same kind, gradual change as was produced
In Pennsylvania. . . . The new States which are to
be formed will be under the control of Congress in this
particular, and slavery will never be introduced
among them. — Elliot's Debates, vol. II, p. 452.
Gen. Heath (Mass.):
The migration or importation, etc., is confined to
the States now existing only; new States cannot claim
it. Congress by their ordinance for erecting new
States some time since, declared that the new States
shall be republican, and that there shall be no slavery
In them. — lb., vol. II, p. 115.
Johnson (Va.):
They tell us they see a progressive danger of bring
ing about emancipation. The principle has begun
since the Revolution. Let us do what we will. It will
come round. Slavery has been the foundation of much
of that rapacity and dissipation which have been so
much disseminated among our countrymen. If it were
totally abolished, it would do much good. — lb., vol. Ill,
pp. 6-48.
GovR. Eandolph (Va.):
I hope there are none here who, . . . will ad
vance an objection dishonorable to Virginia, that, at
the moment they are receiving the rights of their citi
zens, there Is a spark of hope that those unfortunate
men now held In bondage may, by the operation of the
general government, be made free. — lb., vol. Ill, p. 598.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 141
Patrick Henry (Va.)
[argued for] the power of Congress ... to abol
ish slavery in the States. Another thing will con
tribute to bring this event about. Slavery is detested.
We feel its effects. We deplore it with all the pity of
humanity. — lb. vol. Ill, p. 4S3.
On the presentation of the Quaker memorial
on slave trade to the House of Representatives,
March, 1790, Jackson (Ga.), said:
The situation of the slaves here, their situation in
their native states, and the disposal of them in case
of emancipation, should be considered. That slavery
was an evil habit he did not mean to controvert; but
that habit was already established, and there were
peculiar situations in countries which rendered that
habit necessary. Such situations the states of South
Carolina and Georgia were in: large tracts of the most
fertile lands on the continent remained uncultivated
for the want of population. It was frequently ad
vanced on the fioor of Congress how unhealthy those
climates were, and how Impossible it was for northern
constitutions to exist there. What, he asked, is to
be done with this uncultivated territory? Is it to re
main a waste? Is the rice trade to be banished from
our coasts? Are Congress willing to deprive them
selves of the revenue arising from that trade, and which
is daily increasing, and to throw this great advantage
in the hands of other countries? . . . — Annals, vol.
II, pp. 1197-1205.
Eight years later the territory of Mississippi
was organized. On motion to strike out the
clause protecting slavery in the territory, Mr.
Harper (S. C), said :
In the Northwest Territory the regulation forbidding
slavery was a very proper one, as the people inhabiting
that part of the country were from parts where slavery
did not prevail, and they had of course no slaves
amongst them; but in the Miss. Territory . that
species of property already exists, and persons emigrat
ing there from the Southern States would carry with
them property of this kind. To agree to such a propo-

142 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
sition would, therefore, be a decree of banishment to
all the persons settled there and of exclusion to all
those intending to go there it struck at the
habits and customs of the people. — Berton's Debates,
vol. II, p. 221 f.
Mr. Varnum (Mass.)
thought the high-price of lands in the N. W. Terri
tory was due to the absence of slavery "and If the
Southern States could get clear of their slaves, the
price of their land would immediately rise." — lb., p.
221 f.
Mr Giles (Va.)
thought that if the slaves ol the Southern States were
permitted to go into this Western country, by lessen
ing the number in those States, and spreading them
over a large surface of country there would be a greater
probability of ameliorating their condition. — lb., p.
221 f.
At the time of the organization of Arkansas
as a territory, in 1819, a long and bitter debate
took place. These extracts show the spirit:
Walker (N. C):
Shall they [the South] be proscribed and prohibited
from taking their slaves? Sir, if so, your land will be
an uncultivated waste — a fruitless soil; it is further
south than the 35th degree of latitude, a low and warm
country, that will not support a laboring white popula
tion. Slavery is an evil we have long deplored but cannot
cure; it was entailed upon us by our ancestors; it was
not our original sin, and we cannot, in our present
situation, release ourselves from the embarrassment;
and, as It Is an evil, the more diffusive, the lighter it
will be felt, and the wider it is extended the more equal
the proportion of inconvenience. — Annals, vol. XXXIV,
p. 1226. McLane (Dejaware):
The fixing of a line on the West of the Miss., north
ol which slavery should not be tolerated had always

mise IT. migni consmuuonauy oe enecieo.
If we meet upon principles of reciprocity we cannot
fail to do justice to all. It has already been avowed
by gentlemen from the South and the West
that they will agree upon a line which shall divide the
slaveholding from the non-slaveholding states. It is
this proposition I am anxious to effect; but I wish to
effect It by some compact which shall be binding upon
all parties, and all subsequent legislatures; which can
not be changed and will not fluctuate with the diver
sity ol feeling and of sentiment to which this Empire
In its course must be destined. — lb., p. 1227 f.
The Missouri question, and line of 36° 30',
1819-'21. Reid (Ga.):
Slavery is "an unnatural state; a dark cloud which
obscures half the lustre of our free institutions! But
It Is a fixed evil which we can only alleviate. Are we
called upon to emancipate our slaves? I answer, their
welfare — the safety of our citizens, forbid it." — Annals,
vol. XXXV, p. 1024.
If you remain inexorable; if you persist in refusing
the humble, the decent, the reasonable prayer of Mis
souri, is there no danger that her resistance will rise
in proportion to your oppression? Sir, the firebrand,
which is even now cast into your society will require
blood — ay; and the blood of freemen — lor its quench
ing. Your Union shall tremble as under the force of
an earthquake. — lb., p. 1033.
Barbour (Va.):
I am not easily alarmed, nor am I disposed to be an
alarmist; but this I will say, that I fear this subject
will be an Ignited spark, which, communicated to an
immense mass of combustion, will produce an explosion
that will shake this Union to its center. This por-
tentious subject, twelve months ago, was a little spark
scarcely visible above the horizon; it has already over
cast the heavens, obscuring every other object. — lb., p.
107.

144 AkteRICAi^ HISTORY ^TtJDIfiS.
Whitman (Mass.):
In the degree in which you increase the proportion
of the free beyond that of the slave population, in the
same ratio you increase, the chance for emancipation,
final and total. The best mode, . to
promote the cause of a final emancipation would be
to suffer the slaves to be scattered thinly over the
western States. The permission of slavery in the
Territory of Arkansas will afford no additional facili
ties to the introduction of this unfortunate race
from abroad. The natural increase will be the same
whether in one part of the Union or the other; or if
it would be greater in the Western country, it would
be the consequence of an ameliorated condition and
therefore not to be regretted. — Annals, vol. XXXIV, pp.
1274-5. Why may we not continue in this way, admitting
states off against the non-slaveholding states westerly,
with the restriction, and off against the slaveholding
States without it? True, sectional lines are to be ab
horred: But we have them in relation to this subject
already. The line [of the Ohio] is distinctly marked.
Having so begun we must continue on. — lb., p.
1278. Jefferson writes:
[1820.] The coincidence of a marked principle, moral
and political, with geographical lines, once conceived,
I feared would never more be obliterated from the
mind; that It would be recurring on every occasion
and renewing irritations, until it would kindle such
mutual and mortal hatred as to render separation
preferable to eternal discord. I have been among the
most sanguine in believing that our Union would be
of long duration. I now doubt it much.— Jefferson,
Works, vol. VII (Washington ed.), p. 158.
questions.
1. Were negroes subject to military service? 2
What does this imply in regard to their position?
3. Were there many negroes In the north? 4. Why
the law against the negroes being abroad at night ''
5. How long had they been away from Africa at this
time? 6. Why did they question whether the negro

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 145
Shduld be Christianized? 7. How aid they settle the
matter? 8. How about their right to testify? 9. Why
do you suppose such a law was passed? 10. Why the
acts against assembling of negroes? 11. Make a list
of the states that had harsh laws against the negro.
32. Why such laws? 13. Who flrst began to oppose
slavery? 14. What reasons given? 15. Write an essay
on the subject ol slavery in the colonies. 16. What
change of tone at the beginning of the Revolution?
17. From what section does the greatest opposition
come? 18. How do you explain the change? 19. Who
did they blame for the slave trade? 20. Did they stop
it? 21. How were they going to try to stop It? 22.
How did Jefferson feel on the subject? 23. Collect all
the thoughts you can from Jefferson on the subject.
24. In 1785 how, according to Jefferson, was slavery
regarded north of the Potomac? 25. How did the
leaders in Virginia feel about emancipation? 26. Did
Jefferson predict truthfully in regard to future? 27.
Make an outline to show the views, plans, and predic
tions ol Jefferson. 28. What other men opposed? 29.
What were their arguments? 30. What do you believe
to be the cause ol such a radical revolution in thought?
31. Name the compromises in the constitution. 32'
Give their terms. 33. Any change in tone in discus
sion Irom that ol writings just quoted? 34. What
does the change mean? 35. What section is strongest
against slavery and the slave trade? 36. Write an
essay on slavery in the constitution, including therein
the debates. 37. Trace the character ol the arguments
in congress. 38. Gather all the moral arguments you
can. 39. Do both sides use them? 40. Note all the
industrial points in the arguments. 41. Which side
uses such arguments most effectively? 42. What Is
the political argument? 43. Compare the feeling of
1775 and that of 1820. 44. Mark all the changes. 45.
Which section has changed most? 46. What predic
tions do Adams and Jefferson make about 1820? 47.
What is their argument? 48. Did they prove to be cor
rect? 49. Jefferson's thought on compromise of 1820?
50. Write essay on whole subject.

AMERICAN HISTORY StUblES.

Volume II. will include the following numbers:
(1) Gallatin, (3) Adams, J. Q., (3) Clay, (4) Webster,
(5) Calhoun, (6) 'Sumner, (7) Douglas, (8 Seward, (9)
Chase, (10) Blaine.
Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents. Ten or more
copies of one number, 4 cents each. Yearly subscrip
tion, 40 cents. Ten or more subscriptions to one ad
dress, 30 cents each.

EUROPEAN HISTORY STUDIES.

Volume II. will include the following numbers;
(1) Christian and Pagan, (2) The Teutonic Barbari
ans, (3) Selections from the Koran, (4) Feudalism, (5)
, Chivalry and the Mode of Warfare, (6) Monasticism,
(7) The Jews during the Middle Ages, (8i The Rise of
Cities, 19) Medieval Industries, (10) Medieval Science.
Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents. Ten or more
copies of one number, 3 cents each. Yearly subscrip
tion, 40 cents. Ten or more subscriptions to one ad
dress, 30 cents each.
Volume I., loose, 40 cents; bound, 55 cents.

THE NORTH WESTERN MONTHLY.

The North Western Monthly is a magazine
devoted to University Extension and to the correlation
of all the educational forces of a community. It advo
cates the source method of teaching history, and con
tains each month studies from the Sources in American
History, and Sources in European History.
Other Departments- Studies in Economics, Out
side Educational Forces, Child Study, Studies in
English, etc.
Price $1.25 per year. Sample copy sent free.
Address J. H. Miller, Publisher,
Lincoln, Neb.

American History Studies

No. 7.

MARCH, ,898.

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES

II.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H W. CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA.

AINSWORTH & COMPANY,
378-388 Wabash Avenue, CHICAGO, ILL.

Yearly Subscription, 40 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

AMERICAN HISTORY S ; UDIES.

SLAVEEY IN THE UNITED STATES.
A
c^-iA, FOUND it utterly impossible to handle the
'^ subject orf slavery in a satisfactory manner
"", in one asttele; and it must be confessed
that two numbers even do hardly more than
touch the abundance of interesting and valu-
a,l>le matter that lies at hand.
In the last number we had just reached the
moment when this question began to absorb a
}*rge part of the thought of the American peo-
]^«. This article begins with the struggle over
the "Incendiary Publications" and the "Right
»f Petition," of which J. Q. Adams was the hero,
3*d effids with the inauguration of Lincoln.
The next number will deal with the Civil War
Mfi\ Heconstruction.
4. Q. Adams writes, 1820 :
Slavery is the great and foul stain upon the North,
A^'trican Union, and it is a contemplation worthy of
t*is most exalted soul whether its total abolition is or
Is not praati cable: if practicable hy what means it
may ha efte-eted, and if a choice of laeans be within the
scope of the object, what means would accomplish it at
the smallest cost of human suffering. A dissoUitifta,
at least tssaporary, of the Union, as now constituted,
would be certainly iwtessary, and the dissolution miiat
be upon a point iflvtdving the queatia* efi slavery, anrl
no other. ' The Union mM^ tten Ire cffganlz*a . on the
fundamental principle of eman«ij^.tion. The object is
vast in its compass, awful in its prospects, sublime and
beautiful in its issue, a life devoted to it would be nobly
spent or sacrificed. — J. Q. Adams, Memoirs, vol. IV, p.
131. If slavery be the destined sword In the hand of the

SLAVERY IN THB UNITED STATES. 149
destroying angel which Is to sever the ties of this
Union, the same sword will cut in sunder the bonds of
slavery Itself. A dissolution of the Union for the cause
of slavery would be followed by a servile war in the
slave-holding States combined with a war between the
two severed portions of the Union. It seems to me
that its result must be the exterpation of slavery from
this whole continent; and, calamitous and desolating
as this course of events in its progress must be, so
glorious would be Its final Issue, that as God shall judge
me, I do not say that It Is not to be desired.
Never since human sentiments and human conduct
WM-e influenced by human speech was there a theme for
eloquence like the free side of this question.
Oh, If but one man could arise with a genius capable
of communicating those eternal truths that belong to
this question, to lay bare in all its nakedness that out
rage upon the goodness of God, human slavery; now
Is the time and this Is the occasion, upon which such a
man would perform the duties of an angel upon earth.
—Ibid, vol. V, p. 210.
Haynb speaks on the Panama mission in the
United States senate, March, 1826, in these pro
phetic words:
The question of slavery is one. In all its bearinfes of
extreme delicacy; and concerning which I know of but
a single wise and safe rule, either for the states in
which it exists or for the Union. It must be considered
and treated entirely as a domestic question. With re
spect to foreign nations, the language of the United
States ought to be, that it concerns the peace of our
own political family, and therefore we cannot permit it
to be touched; and In respect to the slaveholding s.ates,
the only safe and constitutional ground on which they
can stand is, that they will not permit it to be brought
into question, either by their sister states or by the
federal government It Is a matter for ourselves. To
touch It at all, is to violate our most sacred rights — to
put in jeopardy our dearest interests — the peace of our
country — the safety of our families, our altars, and our
firesides. . On the slave question my opinion is
this: I consider our rights in that species of property as
not even open to discussion, either here or elsewhere;
and In respect to our duties, (imposed by our situation,)

150 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
we are not to be taught them by fanatics, religious, or
political. To call Into question our rights, is grossly to
violate them; to attempt to instruct us on this subject
Is to insult us; to dare to assail our Institutions, is
wantonly to invade our peace. Let me solemnly de
clare, once for all, that the Southern States never will
permit, and never can permit, any interference what
ever in their domestic concerns; and that the very day
on which the unhallowed attempt shall be made by the
authorities of the federal government, we will consider
ourselves as driven from the Union. Let the conse
quences be what they may, they never can be worse
than such as must inevitably result from suffering a
rash and Ignorant interference with our domestic peace
and tranquillity. But I apprehend no such
violation of our constitutional rights. I believe that
this house is not disposed and that the great body of
our intelligent and patriotic fellow-citizens In the other
states have no Inclination whatever to Interfere with
us. If we are true to ourselves w© shall have
nothing to fear. — Benton.
By 1831 the raising of slaves in the northern
states for market had become a recognized in
dustry, as may be seen from the following let
ters and speeches:
Henry Clay, in an address before the Ken
tucky Colonization Society in 1829, said:
It is believed that nowhere in the United States
would slave labor be generally employed, if the pro
prietor was not tempted to raise slaves by the high
price of the Southern market, which keeps it up In his
own.— /6id, p. 257.
Prof. Dew, president of William and Mary
college, in reviewing the debates in the Vir
ginia constitutional convention, in 1831-2, said
of the domestic slave trade:
A full equivalent being thus left In the place oi the
slave, this Immigration becomes an advantage to the
State, and does not check the black population .
because It furnishes every inducement to the master
to attend to the negroes, to encourage breeding, and to

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 151
cause the greatest number possible to be raised. . . .
Virginia is in tacc a negro-raising biaie lor other States.
—Goodell, p. 250.
Chas. F. Mercer, in the Virginia constitu
tional convention of 1829, said:
The tables of the natural growth of the slave popula
tion demonstrate, when compared with the [actual]
Increase of its numbers in the Commonwealth for 20
yrs. past, that an annual revenue of not less than ai
million and a half of dollars is derived from the ex
portation of a part of this population. — Ibid, p. 250.
Mr. Gholson, in the Virginia legislature,
January 18, 1831
[Claimed the right of] the owner of brood mares to
their product, and of the owner of female slaves to their
Increase. The legal maxim of partus sequiter vcntrem
is coeval with the existence of the right of property
itself, and is founded in wisdom and justice. It Is on
the justice and inviolability of this maxim that the
master foregoes the services of a female slave — has her
nursed and raises the helplesa infant offspring. The
value of the property justifies the expense; and I do
not hesitate to say that In its increase consists much
of our wealth. — Ibid, p. 257,
Let us now see what views were held in re
gard to the printing and disseminating of aboli
tion literature by 1835.
The South Carolina legislature passed this re
solve in 1835:
Resolved, That the Iveglslature of South Carolina, hav
ing every confidence in the justice and friendship of
the non-slaveholding States, announces her confident ex
pectation, and she earnestly requests, that the Govern
ment of these States will promptly and effectually sup
press all those associations within their respective
limits, purporting to be abolition societies. . . .— '
Cited in Goodell, p. 41S.
The North Carolina general assembly [1835] :
Resolved, That our sister States are respectfully re
quested to enact penal laws, prohibiting the printing,

152 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
withia their respective limits, all such publications
as may have a tendency to naka our slaves Jiscoa-
tented.— I6id, p. 4IS.
The Alabama legislature [1836] :
Resolved, That we call upon our sister States, and
respectfully request them to enact such penal laws as
will finally put an end to the malignant deeds of the
abolitionists. — Ibid, p. 413.
Virginia legislature [1836] :
Resolved, That the non-slaveholding States of the
Union are respectfully but earnestly requested promptly
to adopt penal enactments or such other measures as
will effectually suppress all" associations within their
respective limits purporting to be, or having the char
acter of abolition societies. — Ibid, p. 41f.
On learning that the United States mails had
been searched for "incendiary documents" at
Charleston, South Carolina, on July 29, 1835,
Postmaster-General Amos Kendall said:
By no act or direction of mine, official or private,
could I be Induced to aid, knowingly. In giving circula
tion to papers of this description, directly or indirectly.
We owe an obligation to the laws, but a higher one to
the communities in which we live, and if the former be
permitted to destroy the latter, it is patriotism to dis
regard them. Entertaining these views I cannot sanc
tion, and will not condemn, the step you have taken.
Your justification must be looked for in the character
of the papers detained and the circumstances by which
you are surrounded. — Ibid, p. 416.
President Jackson, in his annual message,
December, 1835, used these words in discussing
the subject:
1 would therefore call the special attention of Con
gress to the subject, and respectfully suggest the pro
priety of passing such a law as will prohibit under
severe penalties, the circulation, in the Southern States,
through the mail, of incendiary publications. Intended
to Instigate the slaves to insurrection.

SL.WERY IN THB UNITED STATES. 153
THE RIGHT OP PETITION.
King (Ala.) :
We were sent here to do the business of the public
and not to set up arbitrary codes for the protection
of our dignity, and then be left to determine what
dignity means. I consider true senatorial dignity to
consist in a straight-forward, independent discharge
of our constitutional duties, and not in searching
into the language employed by our constituents,
when they ask us for a redress of grievances, to see
if we cannot find some pretext to commit a fraud
upon the constitution. — Bcnioii, vol. XIl, p. 723.
Buchanan (Pa.):
Let it once be understood that the sacred right of
petition and the cause of the abolitionists must rise or
fall together, and the consequences may be fatal.
We have just as little right to interfere with slavery
in the South as we have to touch the right of peti
tion. Can a republican government exist with
out it? If the people have a constitutional
right to petition, a corresponding duty is imposed upon
us to receive their petitions. — Ibid, pp. 73S-5.
Adams :
[A discussion on petitions Is bound to be merely] a
discussion upon the merits of slavery. Sir, on such a
discussion every speech made by a Representative from
the north of Mason and Dixon's line, in this House,
will be an incendiary pamphlet and what will you do
with them? The newspapers report these
speeches; every speech is circulated through your
whole country; and how can you arrest It? .
Well, sir, you begin with suppressing the right of peti
tion; you must next suppress the right of speech in
this House; for you must offer a resolution that every
member who dares to express a sentiment of this kind
shall be expelled, or that speeches shall not go forth
to the public — shall not be circulated. ^ What will be
the consequence then? You suppress the right of
petition; you suppress the freedom of speech; the free
dom of the press, and the freedom of religion; for, in
the minds of many worthy, honest, and honorable men,
fanatics, if you please so to call them, this Is a re-

154 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
llgious question . . . and however erroneous may
be their conclusions, It Is not for me, nor for this
House, to judge them. — Ibid, vol. XIII, pp. 9-10.
Calhoun was the great apostle of the south,
and his words — ^the words of an honest man —
will usually give us the very clearest insight
into the thought of his section:
On the right of rejecting abolition petitions, al
though, in his opinion, one of the clearest that can be
Imagined, we of the South were, unfortunately for the
peace of the country, In a minority. So, also, on the
question of the constitutional right of abolishing slav
ery in this District and the Territories, and also on
every other particular question which has been at
tempted to be raised on constitutional grounds, as a
barrier to our rights and security. What remains,
then, short of taking our protection into our own hands,
but to find some barrier in the general character and
structure of our political system? and where can we
find that but in the view of the Constitution, which
considers it as a compact between sovereign and In
dependent States, formed for their mutual prosperity
and security?
He saw (said Mr. C.) In the question before us the
fate of the South. It was a higher than the mere
naked question of master and slave. It Involved a
great political institution, essential to the peace and
existence of one-half of this Union.
They were there Inseparably united, beyond the pos
sibility of separation. Experience had shown that the
existing relation between them secured the peace and
happiness of both. eEach had improved; the inferior
greatly; so much so, that It had attained a degree of
civilization never before attained by the black race in
any age or country. Under no other relation could they
co-exist together. To destroy it was to Involve a whole
region In slaughter, carnage, and desolation; and,
come what will, we must defend and preserve It.
This agitation has produced one happy effect at
least; it has compelled us of the South to look into the
nature and character of this great institution, and to
correct many false impressions that even we had en
tertained In relation to it. Many in the South onco be-

SLAVERY l.N THE UNITED STATES. 155
lieved that it was a moral and political evil; that folly
and delusion are gone; we see it now in Its true light
and regard it as the most safe and stable basis for free
Institutions in the world. — Congressional Globe, vol. VI,
pp. 29, 61-62. . It is easy to see the end. By the necessary
course of events, if left to themselves, we must be
come, finally, two peoples. It is impossible under the
deadly hatred which must spring up between the two
great sections, if the present causes are permitted to
operate unchecked, that we should continue under the
same political system. The conflicting elements would
burst the Union asunder. We of the South
will not, cannot, surrender our Institutions. . .
But let me not be understood as admitting, even by
implication, that the existing relations between the
two races in the slaveholding States is an evil: — far
otherwise; I hold It to be a good, as It has thus far
proved Itself to be to both, and will continue to prove
so if not disturbed by the fell spirit of abolitionism.
[Discusses relations; then says:] But I take higher
ground. I hold that in the present state of civilization,
where two races of different origin, and distinguished
by color, and other physical differences, as well as in
tellectual, are brought together, the relation now exist
ing In the slaveholding States between the two, is, in
stead of an evil, a good — a positive good. — Calhoun,
Works, vol. II, pp. 629-30.
The various "Gag" rules, or rules to prevent
the reception and discussion of petitions in re
gard to slavery, were passed as follows:
[PInckney's of 5|26|1836. Adopted by 117 to 68 votes
In House of Representatives]:
"Resolved, That all petitions, memorials, resolutions,
and propositions relating, in any way, or to any extent,
whatever, to the subject of slavery, shall, without be
ing either printed or referred, be laid on the table, and
no further action whatever shall be had thereon."
Hawes', 1|18|'37: enacted by 115 to 47.
Patton's, 12|21|'37: enacted by 122 to 74.
Atherton's, 1|12|'38: enacted by 126 to 78.
Johnson's, 1128|'40: enacted by 114 to 108, and made a
standing rule of the House till 1846.— Goodell, pp. 422-3.

156 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
William Lloyd Garrison and Wendell Phil
lips, as the leaders of the Abolitionists, speak in
no uncertain tones, as the following extracts
will show:
W. L. Garrison in Faneuil Hall, 1843.
Resolved, That the compact which exists between the
North and the South is "a covenant with death and an
agreement with hell" — involving both parties In atro
cious criminality, and should be immediately annulled.
We cannot regard any man as a consistent abolition
ist who, while holding to the popular construction of
the Constitution, makes himself a party to that instru
ment, by taking any office under It requiring an oath,
or voting for Its support.
Resolutions of Wendell Phillips.
That the abolitionists of this country should make it
one of the primary objects of their agitation, to dis
solve the American Union; [and again] That secession
from the present United States Government is the duty
of every abolitionist; since no one can take office, or
throw a vote for another to hold office, under the
United States Constitution, without violating his anti-
slavery principles, and rendering himself an abettor of
the slaveholder in his sin.
W. L. Garrison, in an address to the Friends
of Freedom in the United States, undertook a
fresh declaration of its principles — first, as re
gards slavery:
That it ought to be immediately and forever abol
ished; and as regards the existing national compact,
"That it is a covenant with death and an agreement
with hell," and that henceforth, therefore, until slavery
be abolished the watchword shall be No Union With
Slavkholders. Continued — To accomplish this sublifiie resolution
the Society registers its sacred pledge to continue its
agitation on the above lines. — Life and Writings of
William Lloyd Garrison, vol. Ill, pp. 88, 90, 100.
PLATFORMS.
Buffalo platform of Free Soil Party of 8-9-1848.
Resolved, That we . do plant ourselves upon

SLAVERY IN THB UNITED STATES. 157
the National Platform of Freedom, In opporsltton to the
Sectional Platform of Slavery.
Resolved, That slavery In the several States ot this
Union which recognize its existence, depends upon
State laws alone, which cannot be repealed or modified
by the Federal Government, and for which laws that
Government is not responsible. We therefore propose
no Interference by Congress with slavery within the
limits of any State.
Resolved, That . . the entire history of that
period [1784-7, etc.] clearly shows that It was the set
tled policy of the nation not to extend, nationalize, or
encourage, but to limit, localize, and discourage slav
ery; and to this policy, which should never have been
departed from, the Government ought to return.
Resolved, That we accept the Issue which the slave
power has forced upon us, and to their demand for
more slave States, and more slave Territory, our calm
but flnal answer is. No more slave States, and no more
slave Territory. Let the soil of our extensive domains
be ever kept free. . . .
From 1845 to 1850 the great question in con
gress was in regard to the nature of the power
of government in the territorials. The following
extracts suggest several views:
If . that experiment [annexation of new soil]
shall not prove successful, so as to disprove the as
serted possibility of the co-existence of the two races
and two colors, side by side, on the same soil. In a rela
tion of freedom and equality of rights, how can any of
the friends of either desire to keep them forcibly pent
up within the States when every day is tending faster
and faster to ferment the discordant elements into a
result which threatens to be the dissolution of both —
instead of opening this safety valve by which the nox
ious vapor may pass off harmlessly and insensibly?
Crowd then your population into the Southern States
as you may, rapidly and without fear. Texas will open
before it as an outlet, and slavery, retiring from the
Middle and Southern States of the present confederacy,
will find for a time a resting-place there. But only for
a time. For the irresistable law of population which
decrees that In a densely peopled region slavery shall

158 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
cease to exist, will emancipate Texas in her turn, and
the negro will then pass to a land of political freedom
and social dignity under a genial sky. He will pass
without convulsion and leaving no domestic ruin in
his path. As his labor becomes less and less valuable,
emancipation, a gradual, progressive, at last universal,
will pass him over the southern border to his own ap
propriate home In Mexico and the States beyond. —
Democratic Review, vol. XXIII, p. 106, IS48.
Ehett (S. C.) :
The Court declares that the territories belong to the
United States. They are tenants in common, or joint
proprietors and co-sovereigns over them. As co-sov
ereigns they have agreed In their common compact, the
Constitution, that their agent, the General Government,
"may dispose of and make all needful rules and regula
tions" with regard to them, but beyond this, they are
not limited or limi table In their rights. Thvs sov
ereignty, unalienated and unimpaired by this mutual
concession to each other, exists in all its plenitude
over our territories; as much so as within the limits of
the States themselves. Yet there can be no conflict,
for none of the States can make any "rules and regula
tions" separately within the territories, which may
bring them In conflict. The "rules and regulations"
prevailing will be made by all and obligatory on all,
through their common agency, the government of the
United States. The only effect and probably the only
oh.iect of their reserved sovereignty is that it secures
to each State the right to enter the territories with her
citizens and settle and occupy them with their prop
erty — with whatever is recognized as property by each
State. The ingress of the citizen is the ingress of his
sovereign, who is bound to protect him in his settle
ment. He is not responsible to any of the co-
sovereigns for the nature of his property. — GJobe, 29th
Congress, Second Session, App., p. 246.
Senator Butler (S. C):
His advice to his constituents would be, to go'to these
new territories with arms In their hands; to go as
armed communities, and take possession of the lands
which they had helped to acquire, and see who would
attempt to dispossess them. . . So help him God

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATE* 159
he would so advise his constituents to take with them
their property there and settle at all hazards. — Globe,
SOth Congress, First Session, p. 1060.
Calhoun (S. C):
The separation of the North and South Is completed.
The South has now a most solemn obligation to per
form — to herself — to the Constitution — to the Union.
She is bound to come to a decision not to permit this to
go on any further but to show that, dearly as she prizes
the Union, there are questions which she regards as of
greater Importance than the Union. — Ibid, p. 1074.
Webster (Mass.):
We certainly do not prevent them [Southern men]
from going into these territories with what is in general
law called property. But these States have by their
local laws created a property in persons, and they can
not carry these local laws with them. . No man
can be held as a slave, except the local law shall ac
company him. — Ibid, p. 1078.
Dickinson (N. Y.):
That no conditions can be constitutionally Imposed
upon any territorial acquisition, inconsistent with the
right of the people thereof to form a free, sovereign
State, with the powers and privileges of the original
members pf the Confederacy, I deem too obvious for
serious argument. Whatever laws Congress may con
stitutionally enact for the regulation of the territories of
the United States are subject to be altered or repealed
at pleasure. . . Every State admitted to the Union
from the moment of its admission, enjoys all the rights
of sovereignty common to every other member of the
Confederacy. . . If any State Is prohibited from
[any of or] all the rights of every other then it is not
, . a sovereign State. . . Every State after its
admission, may, in virtue of its oiwn sovereign power,
establish or abolish this institution [slavery] whatever
may have been the conditions Imposed, or attempted to
be imposed, upon It during its territorial existence.
Whatever power may or may not rest in Congress
under the Constitution, that instrument could not take
from the people of territories the right to prescribe their
own domestic policy; nor has it attempted any such

160 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
office. . . . The republican theory teaches that sov
ereignty resides with the people of a State, and not with
its political organization. . . If sovereignty re
sides with the people and not with the organization, it
rests as well with the people of a Territory, in all that
concerns their internal condition as with the people of
an organized State. And if In this respect a
form of government is proposed to them by the Federal
Government, and adopted or acquiesced In by them, they
may afterwards alter or abolish it at pleasure. Al
though the government of a Territory has not the same
sovereign power as the government of a State in Its
political relations, the people of a Territory have, in all
that appertains to their internal condition, the same
sovereign rights as the people of a State. — Ibid, p. 88.
Calhoun (S. C):
The assumption [that the sovereignty resides in the
Inhabitants of the territories] Is utterly unfounded, un
constitutional, without example, and contrary to the
entire practice of the government from Its commence
ment to the present time. — Globe, 31st Congress, First
Session, p. 4514-
Compromise of 1850.
CLAY(Ky.):
It would not be possible to get twenty votes In the
Senate, or a proportional vote in the House, Clay said.
In favor of the recognition of slavery south of 36 degrees
30 minutes. "It is impossible. All that you can get —
all that you can expect to get — all that was proposed at
the last session — is action north of that line, and non
action as regards slavery south of that line. . It is
better for the South, that there should be non-action as
to slavery both north and south of the line— far better
that there should be non-action both sides of the line,
than that there should be action by the interdiction on
the one side, without action for the admission upon the
other side of the line."— GZo6e, vol. XXII, pt. I, p. 125.
Webster (Mass.):
There is not at this moment, within the United
States, or any territory of the United States, a single
foot of land, the character of which ii» regard to its
being free-soil territory or slave te'rritory is not fixed

SLAVERY IN THB UNITED STATES. 161
by some law, and some Irrepealable law beyond the
power of the action of this government.
What, then, have been the causes which have created
so new a feeling in favor of slavery In the South — which
have changed the whole nomenclature of the South on
the subject — and from being thought of and described
In the terms I have mentioned . . It has now be
come an Institution, a cherished institution there; no
evil, no scourge, but a great religious, social, and moral
blessing, as I think I have heard It latterly described?
I suppose this, sir, is owing to the sudden uprising and
rapid growth of the cotton plantations of the South. —
Ibid, p. 272.
Douglas (111.):
You cannot fix bounds to the onward march of this
great and growing country. You cannot fetter the
limbs of a young giant. He will burst your chains. He
will expand and grow, and Increase, and extend civiliza
tion, Christianity, and liberal principles. 'Then, sir, if
you cannot check the growth of the country in that
direction, is It not the part of wisdom to look the danger
in the face, and provide for an event you cannot avoid?
I tell you, sir, you must provide for continuous lines of
settlement from the Mississippi Valley to the Pacific
Ocean. And In making this provision you must decide
upon what principles the territory shall be organized;
and in other words, whether the people shall be allowed
to regulate their domestic institutions in their own
way, according to the provisions of this bill, or whether
the opposite doctrine of congressional interference is to
prevail. Postpone it, if you will; but whenever you do
act, this question must be met and decided. — Sheahan's
Life of Douglas, p. 259.
Seward (N. Y.):
My position concerning legislative compromises is
this, namely: personal, pa-rtizan, temporary, and sub
ordinate questions, may lawfully be compromised; but
principles can never be justly or wisely made the sub
jects of compromise. By principles I mean the elements
in public questions of moral rights, political justice, and
high national expediency. Does any honorable senator
assert a different maxim on the subject of legislative
compromise?

162 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
There Is no peace in this world for compromisers;
there is no peace for those who practice evasion; there
is no peace in a republican land for any statesman but
those who act directly, and boldly abide the popular
judgment whenever It may be fairly and clearly and
fully ascertained, without attempting to falsify the
issue submitted, or to corrupt the tribunal. — Works, vol.
IV, pp. 517, 61L
A. H. Stephens, to his brother Linton, 1850:
In the message received to-day you will see that the
policy of General Taylor is that the people inhabiting
the new acquisitions shall come into the Union as
States, without the adoption of territorial governments.
. But the bearing of this policy on the great ques
tions of the day is a matter still to be considered. Will
the Slavery question be settled in this way? I think
not. My deliberate opinion at this time, or the opinion
I have formed from the best lights before me, is that it
will he the beginning of an end which will be the sever
ance of the political bonds that unite the slave-holding
and non-slaveholding States of this Union. I give you
this view rather in opposition to the one I ventured to
express on the evening of the 25th of December. I then
looked to settlement and adjustment and a preservation
of the Union; and as far as I then saw on the horizon,
I think the opinion was correct. There will, perhaps,
be a temporary settlement and a temporary quiet
But I have lately been taking a farther and a broader
view of the future. When I look at the causes of the
present discontent I am persuaded there will never
again be harmony between the two great sections of
the Union. When California and New Mexico and
Oregon and Nebraska are admitted as States, then the
majority in the Senate will be against us. The power
will be with them to harass, annoy, and oppress. And
it Is a law of power to exert itself, as unlv-srsal as it is
a law of nature that nothing shall stand still. Cast
your eye, then, a few years into the future, and see
what images of strife are seen figuring on the boards!
In the halls of Congress, nothing hut debates about the
crimes and the iniquity of slavery and the duty of the
General Government to withhold all countenance of the
unholy institution of human bondage. Can Southern
men occupy seats in the halls of a Legislature with this

SLAVERY IN THB UNITED STATES. 163
constant reproach? It is not reasonable. It is more
than I expect. It is more than human nature can
expect The present crisis may pass; the present
adjustment may be made; but the great question of the
permanence of slavery in the Southern States will be
far from being settled thereby. And, in my opinion,
the crisis of that question is not far ahead. The very
palliatives now so soothingly administered do but more
speedily develop the stealthly disease which is fast ap
proaching the vitals. My opinion is that a dis
memberment of this Republic is not among the
improbabilities of a few years to come. In all my acts
I shall look to that event. I shall do nothing to favor
it or hasten, but I now consider it Inevitable.
But I should not say much in praise of the Union. I
see no hope to the South from the Union. . . I
do not believe much in resolutions, any way. • . .
If I were now in the Legislature, I should introduce
bills reorganizing the militia, for the establishment of
a military school, the encouragement of the formation
of volunteer companies, the creation of arsenals, of an
armory, and an establishment for making gunpowder.
In these lies our defence. I tell you the argument is
exhausted; and If the South do not intend to be over
run with anti-slavery doctrines, they must, before no
distant day, stand by their arms. My mind Is made
up; I am for the fight. If the country will back me.
And If not we had better have no 'Resolutions.' and
no gasconade. They will but add to our degradation.
My course shall be directed to the future. I
shall regard with little Interest the events of the Inter
vening years. . One other thought. Could the
South maintain a separate political organization? On
this I have thought a great deal. It has been the
most perplexing question to my mind. The result of
my reflections is that she could, if her people be united.
She would maintain her position, I think, better than
the North. She has great elements of power. — John
ston-Browne, lAfe of A. H. Stephens, pp. 243-5.
THB EXCITING YEARS 1850-1860.
They threaten us with a great Northern party, and a
general war up-^n the South. If they were not mere
hucksters In politics — with only this peculiarity, that

164 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
every man offers himself, instead of some other com-
modiiy, for sale — we should surmise that they might do
what they threaten, and thus bring out the real triumph
of the South, by making a dissolution of the Union
necessary. But they will do no. such thing. They will threaten
and utter a world of swelling self-glorification, and end
by knocking themselves down to the highest bidder.
To be sure, if they could make the best bargain by
distroying the South, they would set about it without
delay. But they cannot. They live upon us, and the
South affords them the double glorification of an object
for hatred and a field for plunder. How far they may
be moved to carry their indignation at this time it is
impossible to say; but we may be sure they will cool off
just at the point when they discover that they can
make nothing more out of it, and may lose. — Charleston
Mercury, Quoted by Redpath, Echoes, p. 460.
It is vain to disguise it, the great issue of our day in
this country is. Slavery or no Slavery. The present
phase of that issue is, the extension or non-extension of
the institution, the foundations of which are broad and
solid in our midst. Whatever the general measure-
whatever the political combinations — whatever the
party movement — whatever the action of sections at
Washington, the one single, dominant, and pervading
idea, solving all leading questions, insinuating itself
into every policy, drawing the horoscope of all aspi
rants, serving as a lever or fulcrum for every interest,
class and individuality — a sort of directing fatality, is
that master issue. As in despite of right and reason — ¦
of organisms and men — of interests and efforts, it has
become per se political destiny — why not meet it? It
controls the North, it controls the South — it precludes
escape. It is at last and simply a question between the
South and the remainder of the Union, as sections and
as people. All efforts to give it other direction, to
solve it by considerations other than those which per
tain to them in their local character and fates, to
divest It, to confound it with objects and designs of a
general nature, is [sic] rendered futile. It has to be
determined by the real parties, by their action in their
character as sections — inchoate countries. — Charleston
Evening News, Quoted in Redpath, p. 496.
The North has thus far carried the Sowth on Ita

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 165
shoulders, and this it is bound to do In all time to come.
It has purchased its lands, maintained the fleets and
armies required for Its purposes, and stood between it
and the public opinion of the world while maintaining
the value of its commodities and giving value to its
labor and land. During the whole of this period it has
borne unmeasured insolence, and has for the sake of
peace, permitted its whole policy to be governed by a
body of slaveholders amounting to but little more than
a quarter of a million In number. It has made one
compromise after another until at length the day of
compromise has passed, and has given place to the day
on which the South and the North — the advocates of
Slave labor on the one side and Free labor on the
other — are now to measure strength, and we trust it
will be measured. — Redpath, Echoes, p. 512.
Falstaff was strong in words, but weak in action. So
It is with the South, whose every movement betokens
conscious weakness. For a quarter of a century past
she has been holding conventions, at which it has been
resolved that Norfolk, Charleston and Savannah should
become great commercial cities, which obstinately they
refuse to be. She has resolved upon all kinds of ex
pedients for raising the price of cotton, which yet ia
lower by l-3d. than it was ten years since. She has re-
solirsd to suppress discussion of slavery and the dis
cussion is now more rife than ever before. She has
resolved upon becoming strong and Independent, but
is now more dependent upon the forbearance of the
world than in any time past. Under such circum
stances, there need be small fear of her secession from
the North, which has so long stood between her and
ruin. The irritability of our Southern friends is evi
dence of conscious weakness, and while that irritability
shall continue, the danger of dissolution will continue
to be far distant.
The Union must be continued until at least the South
shall have had the opportunity for taxing the North for
the accomplishment of Its projects. Until then the
Vnion cannot be dissolved. Such being the case, the real
friend of the Union Is he who opposes the annexation
of Cuba and Haytl, and tho extension of slavery; and
the real disunlonist Is he who advocates compliance
with Southern demands. Thus far, all the measures

166 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
adopted for the promotion of the Southern objects
have been followed by increased abuse and increased
threats of separation, and such will certainly be the
case with all such future ones. To preserve the Union,
It is required that the North shall insist on its rights.
, The only real disunionists of the country, north
of Mason and Dixon's line, are the political dough
faces, like Pierce, Douglas, and Richardson, and the
commercial doughfaces who sell themselves
to the South for those objects on which Southern mad
men now are bent. — Redpath, Echoes, 512-13.
An extract from an "Address on Climatology,"
before the Academy of Science at New Orleans :
The institution of slavery operates !)y contrast and
comparison; It elevates the tone ii the superior, adds
to its refinement, allows- "siore time to cultivate the
mind, exalts the standaru: In morals, manners, and in
tellectual endowments, operates as a safety valve for
the evil-disposed, leaving the upper race power, while
it preserves from degradation, in the scale of civiliza
tion, the inferior, which we see in their uniform destiny
when left to themselves. The slaves constitute essen
tially the lowest class, and society is immeasurably
benefited by having this class which constitutes the
offensive fungus — the great cancer of civilized life — a
vast burthen and expense to every community, under
surveillance and control; and not only so, but under
direction as an efficient agent to promote the general
welfare and increase the wealth of the community.
The history of the world furnishes no institution under
similar management, where so much good actually re
sults to the governors and to the governed as this in
the Southern states of North America. — Quoted in Olm
sted's "Cotton Kingdom," p. 277.
As an offset to the preceding let us hear from
Wendell Phillips on "The Lesson of the Hour,"
Brooklyn, Nov. 1, 1859:
Somewhat briefly stated, such is the Idea of
American civilization; uncompromising faith — In the
average selfishness. If you choose — of all classes, neu
tralizing each other, and tending towards that fair play
that Saxons love. But It seems to me that, on all ques-

SLAVERY IN THE UNITED STATES. 167
lions, we dread thought; we shrink behind something;
we acknowledge ourselves unequal to the sublime faith
of our fathers; and the exhibition of the last twenty
years and of the present state of public affairs is, that
Americans dread to look their real position in the face.
, They have no idea of absolute right They
were born since 1787, and absolute right means the
truth diluted by a strong decoction of the Constitution
of 1789. They breathe that atmosphere. They do not
want to sail outside of it; they do not attempt to rea
son outside of it. Poisoned with printer's ink, or
choked with cotton dust, they stare at absolute right,
as the dream of madmen. For the last twenty years,
there has been going on, more or less heeded and un
derstood in various states, an insurrection of ideas
against the limited, cribbed, cabined. Isolated American
civilization interfering to restor absolute right. .
Thank God, I am not a citizen. You will remember,
all of you, citizens of the United States, that there was
not a Virginia gun fired at John Brown. You
shot him. Sixteen marines to whom you pay $8 a
month — your own representatives, . sixteen men,
with the Vulture of the Union above them — your rep
resentatives! It was the covenant with death and
agreement with hell which you call the Union of the
States, that took the old man by the throat with a pri
vate hand. . . . — Redpath, Echoes.
Let us hear Lincoln speak :
If we would first know where we are, and whither we
are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how
to do it. We are now far into the fifth year since a
policy [Kansas-Nebraska bill] was initiated with the
avowed object and confident promise of putting an end
to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that
policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has
constantly augmented. In my opinion. It will not cease
until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A
house divided against Itself cannot stand." I believe
this government cannot endure permanently half slave
and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dis
solved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do ex
pect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one
thing, or all the other. . . . — Lincoln, Works, I.,
V. 240.

168 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
The Lincoln-Douglas debate, 1858:
I do not question Mr. Lincoln's conscientious belief
that the negro was made his equal, and hence is his
brother, but for my own part I do not regard the negro
as my equal, and positively deny that he is my brother
or any kin to me whatever. . He [Lincoln] holds
that the negro was born his equal and yours, and that
he was endowed with equality by the Almighty, and
that no human law can deprive him of these rights
which were guaranteed to him by the Supreme Ruler
of the universe. Now, I do not believe that the Al
mighty ever intended the negro to be the equal of the
white man. He belongs to an inferior race,
and must occupy an inferior position. I do not hold
that because the negro Is our inferior, therefore he
ought to be a slave. By no means can such a conclu
sion be drawn from what I have said. On the contrary,
I hold that humanity and Christianity both require
that the negro shall have and enjoy every right, every
privilege, and every immunity consistent with the
safety of the society In which he lives. . . —
Douglas, in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Works, Lincoln,
I., p. 284.
While I was at the hotel to-day, an elderly gentleman
called upon me to know whether I was really In favor
of producing a perfect equality between the negroes
and white people. . I will say then that I am not,
nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any
way the social and political equality of the white and
black races — that I am not, nor ever have been, in fa
vor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of quali
fying them to hold office, nor to Intermarry with white
people; and I will say In addition to this that there is
a physical difference between the white and black races
which I believe will forever forbid the two races living
together on terms of social and political equality. And
Inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain
together there must be the position of superior and
inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor
of having the superior position assigned to the white
race. — Lincoln, in Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Lincoln's
Works, l^p. 369.

SLAVERY IN THB UNITED S'TATBS. 169
QUESTIONS.
1. What did J. Q. Adams think of slavery? 8. What
did he expect to be necessary In order to secure its
abolition? 3. Was his plan statesmanlike? 4. Were
his predictions In part fulfilled? 5. Did he attempt in
later years the work he here lays out for some man?
6. How did Hayne differ from Adams? 7. Did he see
danger In the questions? 8. What remedy did he pro
pose? 9. How do you explain the different positions?
10. Investigate to see whether Hayne had a constitu
tional foundation for his position. 11. Why did the
northern slave states desire the continuance of the
system? 12. What profit came to Virginia from the
system? 13. Would Virginia naturally favor or oppose
the slave trade?
1. What is meant by "incendiary documents"? 2.
How were they disposed of In the south? 3. Was such
a method right, constitutional? 4. What requests did
the south make of northern states regarding these doc
uments? B. Were they right in demanding their sup
pression? 6. How did President Jackson propose to
deal with the question? 7. Would his plan have been
constitutional? 8. Wliat was the real difficulty?
1. Find out what the constitution says in regard to
the right of petition. 2. Find out the nature of the
petitions sent to Congress. 3. What did Mr. King
think of the petitions? 4. What mistake did the south
make in opposing the reception of petitions ? 5. Name
points in Calhoun's argument. 6. What view does he
take in regard to slavery? 7. Had the south always
held the same views? 8. Did he hold slavery in the
abstract to be a good? 9. What prediction did he
make? 10. Have his predictions been fulfilled? 11.
What objection, if any, to the "gag" rule? 12. What
conclusion can you draw from the various votes on the
"gag" rules?
1. How did Garrison reg*rd the constitution? Why?
2. Was he a secessionist? 3. How does the Buffalo
Platform differ In theory from Garrison and Phillips?
4. How did the Democratic Review believe slavery
would end? 5. What theories are given in various ex
tracts In regard to method of control or government
of the territories? 6. How did Webster hold the char
acter of the institutions of the territories had been
fixed? 7. How did Seward regard compromises? 8.
Was he right? 9. If so what do you say of the men
who made the constitution? 10. What end did A. H.
Stephens predict for the Union? 11. Compare views
of Stephens and Phillips and Garrison. 12. How ex
plain their views?
1. Did the north and the south understand each
other?,, 2. What qualities did the south believe char
acterized the people of the north? 3. What did the
north think of the southern people? 4. Why was Cuba
wished? 5. Did the south believe slavery right? 6.

J 70 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
What arguments given to prove their view? 7. What
did Wendell Phillips think of the character of the
American people in 1859? 8. Was he right? 9. What
difference in tone between Lincoln and Phillips? 10.
How did Lincoln hope to end slavery? 11. How did
Lincoln regard the negro? 12. How Douglas? 13.
What difference in view between the two?
1. JIake an outline covering' this whole period. 2.
Write an essay on the reasons for the contradictory
views of the northern and southern statesmen.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

This series will include the following numbers: (1)
Early Laws of Virginia, Alassachusetts, and the ilid-
dle Colonies. (2) Th» Founding of the Colonies. (3)
Development of Union Among the Colonies. (4)
Steps Leading to the Hevolution. (5) Development of
the Constitution. (6) Growth of Nationality. (7)
Slavery. (8) Slavery. (9) Civil War and Reconstruc
tion. (10) Industrial Development. (11) Abraham
Lincoln. Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents; 25
cents per year. Ten or more copies of one number,
3 cents each.

EUROPEAN HISTORY STUDIES.

This series will include the following numbers: (1)
The Homeric Age. (2) The Athenian Constitution.
(3) Spartan Life. (4) Alexander's Method of Warfare.
(5) The Achaean League. (6) The Roman Constitu
tion. (7) Roman Life of the First Punic War. (8)
Roman Life of the Jugnrthine Period. (9) Roman
Life under the Empire. (10) Roman Laws. Monthly.
Price, single copy, 5 cents; 25 cents per year. Ten
or more copies of one number, 3 cents each.

American History Studies

No. 8.

APRIL, 1898.

THE CIVIL WAR AND RECONSTRDCTION,

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA.

AINSWORTH & COMPANY,
378-388 Wabash Avenue, CHICAGO, ILL.

Yearly Suhscription, 25 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

Published Monthly, Except July and August.
Entered as second-class matter in the Post Office, Lincoln, Nebraska,
U. S. A.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

THB CIVIL WAR AND RECONSTRUCTION
cM^N the last two numbers an attempt was
'^ made to trace the development of the
" slavery question in American history. In
this number the culmination is reached; the
greatest of civil wars opens before us; and
finally the Union appears, — or shall we say re
appears, reconstructed, with slavery as a remi
niscence. However, it must not be thought
that the problem is ended. The American peo
ple are too much inclined to accept flrst settle
ments as if they were finals. Citizenship was
conferred on the negro when he was unprepared
for it. He must now be fitted for his duties^
Education in its broadest terms must be ex
tended to him. The whole country is inter
ested in, and affected by, the solution. The
South has to bear the burden, in the main, as
she had to bear that of slavery. In this con
nection, the most important question of the
present and of the immediate future, at least,
is that the North and the South do not become
estranged over the solution of this question
as they did in regard to the original cause.
Its difficulties should be recognized by the
North, and sympathy and aid, not criticism,
should be given.
This number opens with the election of Lin
coln, and the consequent secession of the South-
ern States. The winter of 1860-'61 was perhaps
the most momentous and deeply interesting of
any tha^ has passed over the history of our
country. There may have been other moments

THE CIVIL WAE AND REOONSTEUCTION. 173
of more outward excitement, but none, perhaps,
of the same intensity. TTiere was a general
feeling as the months passed that the crisis had
come. Tbe North could hardly be brought to
realize that the Southern States intended to act
in accordance with their words; the Southern
people were possessed with the idea that the
North was purely materialistic and would not
fight for an ideal. How little the people of
the two sections really did or could under
stand each other the four years from 1861 to
1865 witness!
However, when the end came, and the greater
resources, — but only the same, not greater cour
age and devotion — had given the victory to the
free states, and in giving them their triumph
had made all free states, the settlement of the
terms of reconstruction, was scarcely less dif
ficult and taxing than had been the details of
the struggle itself.
During the year 1860-'61 almost the entire
history of the United States may be studied
by tracing backward to their beginnings the
principles that were then in controversy. The
nature of the Constitution: were the States
sovereignties? Under this heading we might
trace the development of the idea back through
the Nullification struggle, the Hartford con
vention, the Virginia and Kentucky resolu
tions to the Convention of 1787, and then be
yond to the forces that were foundational.
The position of slavery under the Constitu
tion: its entire history would be necessary to
estimate at their true worth the various argu
ments that were advocated by the many groups
into which the people were at the time divided.
The powers of the executive: what were their
limits in time of war? But it is impossible to
attempt an enumeration of the interesting ques
tions that are found in these years of American

174 AMEKICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
history. Their settlement distinctly modified
the world's history, and was of the greatest
moment in determining the character and fu
ture of the United States.
Lincoln, in his great Cooper Institute speech
of February 27, 1860, discussed the subject of
slavery as he saw it from the standpoint of the
South and of the North. In the concluding
portion he said:
A few words now to Republicans. It is exceedingly
desirable that all parts of this great Confederacy
shall be at peace and in harmony one with another.
Even though the Southern people will not so
much as listen to us, let us calmly consider their de
mands and yield to them if, in our deliberate view of
our duty, we possibly can. What will satisfy
them? Simply this: we must not only let them alone,
but we must somehow convince them that we do let
them alone. . What will convince them? This,
and this only: cease to call slavery wrong, and join
them in calling it right. Their thinking it
right and our thinking it wrong is the precise fact
upon which depends the whole controversy. Think
ing it right, as they do, they are not to blame for de
siring Its full recognition as being right; but thinking
It wrong, as we do, can we yield to them? — Works, I,
pp. 611-12.
December 22, 1860, Lincoln wrote to A. H.
Stephens in reply to a letter from Mr. Stephens
in these words:
I fully appreciate the present peril the country is in,
and the weight of responsibility on me. Do the people
of the South really entertain fears that a Republican
administration would, directly or indirectly, interfere
with the slaves, or with them about the slaves? If
they do, I wish to assure you, as once a friend, and
still, I hope, not an enemy, that there is no cause fop
such fears. The South would be In no more danger
in this respect than it was in the days of Washington.
I suppose, however, this does not meet the case. You
think slavery is right and ought to be extended, while
we think it is wrong and ought to be restricted. . , .
—Ibid, p. 660.

THE CIVIL WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 175
On the way to Washington, in February,
1861, Lincoln made a series of speeches. A
few extracts from these will give us an insight
into Lincoln's views at the last moment before
he assumed office.
At Indianapolis he said:
The words "coercion" and "invasion" are much
used in these days. What, then, is "coercion"?
What is "invasion"? W^ould the marching of an army
into South Carolina without the consent of her people,
and with hostile intent toward them, be "invasion"?
I certainly think it would. . But it the United
States should merely hold and retake its own forts
and other property, etc., . would any or all of
these be "invasion" or "coercion"? — Ibid, p. 873.
In Cincinnati he repeated and reaffirmed the
words he had used in a speech there the year
before. In part he spoke, addressing the peo^
pie of Kentucky, as follows:
We mean to treat you, as near as we possibly can,
as Washington, Jefferson, and Madison treated you.
We mean to leave you alone, and in no way interfere
with your institutions; to abide by all and every com
promise of the Constitution. . Ibid, p. 675.
At Columbus he used these words in con
cluding his address:
I have not maintained silence from any want of
real anxiety. It is a good thing that there is no more
than anxiety, for there is nothing going wrong. It
is a consoling circumstance that when we look out
there is nothing that really hurts anybody. We enter
tain different views upon political questions, but no
body is suffering anything. This is a most consoling
circumstance, and from it we may conclude that all
we want is time, patience, and a reliance on that God
who has never forsaken this people. — Works, I, p. 677.
At Pittsburgh, on the same idea, he said;
Notwithstanding the troubles across the river [point
ing south] there is no crisis but an artificial one.
I repeat, then, there is no crisis excepting such a one
as may be gotten up at any time by turbulent men

176 AMBEIOAN HISTORY STUDIES.
aided by designing politicians. My advice to them,
under such circumstances, is to keep cool. If the great
American people only keep their temper on both sides
of the line, the troubles will come to an end, and the
question which now distracts the country will be set
tled, just as surely as all other diJiiculties oi a like
character which have originated in this government
have been adjusted. — Works, I, p. 678.
Lincoln urges the same thought at Cleveland;
but it is to be noticed that he did not repeat
it again. A deeper and graver tone was mani
fest as he approached Washington.
The foregoing extracts give an insight into
the ideas, and, to some extent, the plans of
Lincoln and the Republicans. Buchanan's An
nual Message states his thoughts fully, if not
clearly. The following excerpts will afford
something of an idea of his point of view:
Why is it, then, that discontent now so
extensively prevails, and the Union of the States, which
is the source of all these blessings, is threatened with
destruction? The long-continued and intemperate interference of
the Northern people with the question of slavery in
the Southern states has at length produced its natural
effects. The different sections of the Union are now
arrayed against each other and the time has arrived,
so much dreaded by the Father of his Country, when
hostile geographical parties have been formed. .
How easy would it be for the American people to
settle the slavery question forever, and to restore
peace and harmony to this distracted country!
All that is necessary to accomplish the object, and all
for which the slave states have ever contended, is to
be let alone and permitted to manage their domestic
. institutions in their own way. As sovereign States,
they, and they alone, are responsible before God and
the world for the slavery existing among them.
And this brings me to observe that the election of
any one of our fellow-citizens to the office of President

THE CIVIL WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 177
does not of Itself afford just cause for dissolving the
Union. . . In order to justify a resort to revolu
tionary resistance, the Federal Government must be
guilty of "a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exer
cise" of powers not granted by the Constitution.
In order to justify secession as a constitutional
remedy, it must be on the principle that the Federal
Government is a mere voluntary association of States.
If this be so, the Confederacy is a rope of sand,
. . . [which] might be broken into fragments in a
few weeks, which cost our forefathers many years of
toil, privation, and blood to establish.
Such a principle is wholly inconsistent with the his
tory as well as the character of the Federal Constitu
tion. . . .
It [the Union] was intended to be perpetual, and n'ot
to be annulled at the pleasure of any one of the con
tracting parties.
It may be asked, then, are the people of the States
without redress against the tyranny and oppression
of the Federal Government? By no means. The right
of resistance on the part of the governed against the
oppression of their governments cannot be denied.
It exists independently of all constitutions. .
But the distinction must ever be observed that this is
revolution against an established government, and not
a voluntary secession from it by virtue of an inherent
constitutional right. In short, let us look the danger
fairly in the face; secession is neither more nor less
than revolution. It may or it may not be a justifiable
revolution, but still it is revolution. . . .
Then in speaking of the power of Congress
or the president to coerce a State, should it
attempt secession, he used this language:
The question fairly stated is: Has the Constitution
delegated to Congress the power to coerce a State into
submission which Is attempting to withdraw, or has
actually withdrawn from the Confederacy? .
Buchanan argues against this power, then
says:

178 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
But if we possessed this power, vrould it be wise to
exercise it under existing circumstances?
The fact is, that our Union reiSts upon public opinion
and can never be cemeated by the blood . of its citi
zens shed in civil war. If it cannot live in the affec
tions of the peDpile, it must one day perish. Congress
possesses many means of preserving it by conciliation;
but the sword was not placed in their hand to pre
serve it by force. He then proposes that Congress
submit these ajnendments to the States, as follows:
I. An express recognition of the riglit of property in
slaves in the States. . . .
II. The duty of protecting tbe rig-ht in all the com
mon territories.
III. The like recognition of the right of the master to
have his slave, who has escaped from one State
to another, restored and "delivered up" to him. . .
— Buchanan's Message, Dec. S. I860, Cited in Curtis'
Buchanan, II, pp. 3S7 f.
Passing to the South we see that acts are
substituted for words. Let us see what South
Carolina did.
An Obdinance to dissolve the Union between the
State of South Carolina and other States united
witih her under the compact entitled "The Con-
istitutdon of the United States of America."
We, the people of the State of South Carolina In
convention assembled, do declare and ordain,
that the ordinance adopted by us in convention on the
twenty-third day of May [1788] whereby the Constitu
tion of the United States of America was ratified,
. . . [and amendments] are hereby repealed; and
that the Union now subsisting between South Caro
lina and other States, under the name of the "United
States of America," is hereby dissolved.
Done at Charleston the twentieth day of December,
[I860]. D. F. Jameson,
Delegate from Barnioell and President of i*« Go~iven-
Hon, and Others.
Attest: Bewjamin F. ARTHirn,
Clerk of the Convention.
— Rebellion Records, Series I, vol. 1, p. 110.

THB CIVIL WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 179
Two days after the passage of the above ordi-
nance the State of South Carolina gave the
following commission to Robert W. Barnwell,
James H. Adams, and James L. Orr:
Whereas t!he convention oiT the People of South Caro
lina, . . did . . order that their commis
sioners . . prooeeid to Washington, authorized,
. to treat with the Government of the United
Stateis for the delivery of the forts, magazines, light
houses, and other real estate . . . within the limits
of South Carolina; and also for an apportioning of the
public debt and for a division of the other property
held by the govermnent of the United States as agent
of the confederated States, ol which South Carolina
was recently a member; and generally to negotiate
. . . for the continuance of peace and aimity between
this commonwealth and the Government at Wash
ington: . . — Ibid, p. 111.
On December 28, 1860, the above named com
missioners of South Carolina sent a communi
cation to the president, from which the follow-
in extract is made :
. . In the execution of this trust lit is our duty
to furnish you with an official copy of the
ordinance ol secession, by which the State of South
Carolina has resumed the powers she delegated to the
Government of the United States and has declared her
perfect sovereignty and independence. It would also
have been our duty to have informed you that we
were ready to negotiate with you upon all such ques ¦
tions as are necessarily raised by the adoption of this
ordinance, and that we were prepared to enter upon
this negotiation with the earnest desire to avoid all
unnecessary ajid hostile collision, and so to inaugurate
our new relations as to secure mutual respect, general
advantage, and a future of good will and harmony.
. . But the ©vents of the last twenty-four hours
render sucti an assurance impossible. [This was the
taking possee'sion of Ft. Sumter by Major Anderson.]
And in conclusion we would urge upon you the im
mediate withdrawal of the troops from the harbor

180 AMERICAN HISTOEY STUDIES.
of Chansston. Under present circumstances they are
a standing menace which render negotiations Impossi
ble, and . . threaten speedily to bring to a bloody
issue questions which ought to be settled with tem
perance and judgment. — Ibid, pp. 109-110.
During the winter of 1860-'61 several plans
were proposed to secure such amendments to
the Constitution as would satisfy the various
sections of the country, and thus restore har
mony to the Union. Congress tried its hand
and outlined six propositions, which, however,
were never sent to the states.
On the request of the State of Virginia, a
convention of delegates from the States of the
Union was held in Washington, commencing
February 4th, and closing on the 27th, of the
same mouth, which proposed that Congress
submit seven Constitutional amendments to the
States for their action. Delegates were present
from Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massa
chusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland,
Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky,
Missouri, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, and Kan
sas, including, as delegates, such men as W. P.
Fessenden, L. M. Morrill, Geo. S. Boutwell,
David Dudley Field, David Wilm'Ot, Reverdy
Johnson, Ex-President John Tyler, S. P. Chase,
James Harlan, and James Guthrie. Ex-Presi
dent Tyler, as presiding officer, closed the ses
sion in a speech from which these words are
taken : But I here declare that it has never been
my good fortune to meet with an association ol more
intelligent, thougtitful, or patriotic men. i can
not but hope and believe that the blessing of God will
follow and rest upon the results of your labors, and
that such result will bring to our country that quiet
and peace which every patriotic heart so earnestly de
sires. . . .
Gentlemen, forewell! I go to finish the work you

THE CIVIL WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 181
have assigned me, of presenting your recommendations
to the two Houses of Congress.
May you all Inculcate among your people a spirit
of mutual forbearance and concession; and may God
protect our country and the Union of the States, which
was committed to us as the blood-bought legacy of our
heroic ancestors.
Congress did not submit the propositions as
recommended, but instead the following action
was taken :
Me. Corwin, Republican (O.), in 1861 moved
the following amendment to the Constitution.
This amendment was adopted in the House by
a vote of 133 to 65, and in the Senate 24 to 12.
It reads as follows, and was to be numbered
thirteen :
No amendment shall be made to the Constitution
which will authorize or give to Congress the power
to abolish or Interfere, within any State, with the
domestic Institutions thereof. Including that of per
sons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.
, Contrast this with the 13th Amendment as
adopted in 1865, and one can conceive of the
immense distance that the nation had traversed
in the four years of the civil war.
Neither slavery nor Involuntary servitude, except aa
a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have
been duly convicted, shall exist within the United
States, or In any place subject to their jurisdiction. —
Constitution, Article XIII of Amendments.
When Lincoln was inaugurated as president
in 1861, seven of the Southern States had
passed articles of secession, similar in terms to
those of South Carolina cited above. Already
the States had formed a preliminary constitu
tion, and had chosen officers under it. Thus
there were tw'b organized general governments
in the same territory. Most of the forts and
arsenals in the Southern States had been taken
possession of by troops of the various States

182 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
in which they were situated. Under such con
ditions Lincoln delivered his Inaugural Ad
dress, from which the following extracts are
taken :
Apprehension seems to exist among the people of
the Southern States that by the accession of a Repub
lican administration their property and their peace and
personal security are to be endangered. There has
never been any reasonable cause for such apprehension.
Indeed, the most ample evidence to the contrary has
all the while existed and been open to their inspection.
It is found in nearly all the published speeches of
him who now addresses you. I do but quote from one
of those speeches when I declare that "I have no pur
pose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the in
stitution of slavery in the States where it exists. I
believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have
no inclination to do so" [I860]. Those who nominated
and elected me did so with lull knowledge that I had
made this and many similar declarations, and had
never recanted them. And, more than this, they
placed in the platform for my acceptance, and as a
law to themselves and to me, the clear and emphatic
resolution which I now read:
"Resolved, That the maintenance inviolate ol the
rights of the States, and especially the right ol each
State to, order and control its own domestic institu
tions according to its own judgment exclusively, is
essential to that balance of power on which the per
fection and endurance of our political fabric depend,
and we denounce the lawless invasion by armed force
of the soil of any State or Territory, no matter under
what pretext, as among the greatest of crimes."
I now reiterate these sentiments, and in doing so,
I only press upon the public attention the most con
clusive evidence of which the case is susceptible, that
the property, peace, and security of no section are
to be in anywise endangered by the new incoming
administration. I add, too, that all the protection
which, consistently with the Constitution and the laws
can be given, will be cheerfully given to all the States
when lawfully demanded, for whatever cause — as cheer
fully to one section as to another. I take the
official oath to-day with no mental reservations, and

THE CIVIL WAR AND RECONSTRUCTION. 183
With no purpose to construe the Constitution or laws
by any hypercritical rules. . .
I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of
the Constitution, the Union of these States is pe-rpetual.
Perpetuity is implied. If not expressed, in the funda
mental law of all national governments.
In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow-countrymen,
and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war.
The government will not assail you. You can have no
conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You
have no oath registered In heaven to destroy the gov
ernment, while I shall have the most solemn one to
"preserve, protect, and defend it."
I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends.
We must not be enemies. Though passions may have
strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.
The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every
battle-field and patriot grave to every living heart
and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell
the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely
they will be, by the better angels of our nature. — Lin
coln's Inaugural Address, Works, II, pp. 1-7.
The flrst great question to come before the
new administration was connected with provis
ioning Fort Sumter.. March 15 the president
consulted his cabinet, with results as follows:
Seward said:
If It were possible to peacefully provision
Fort Sumter, of course, I should answer that It would
be both unwise and Inhuman not to attempt It. 'But
the facts of the case are known to be that the attempt
must be made with the employment of military and
marine force, which would provoke combat, and proba
bly initiate civil war.
I have not hesitated to assume that the Federal
Government is committed to maintain, preserve, and
defend the Union— peaceably If it can, forcibly if It
must— to every extremity. . . .
Chase wrote:
If the attempt will so inflame civil wa*- aa
to Involve an immediate necessity for the enlistment
of armies and the expenditure of millions, I cannot

184 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
advise it In the existing circumstances of the country
and in the present condition of the national finances. —
Lincoln's Works, II, pp. 13, 15.
The other members of the cabinet agreed
with the above in general, except Secretary
Blair, who was for sending aid and provisions.
On March 29, for the second time, a written
opinion in regard to the policy of sending an
expedition to relieve Fort Sumter, was asked
of each member of the cabinet.
Mr. Seward wrote:
The- fact of preparation for such an expedition would
inevitably transpire, and would therefore precipitate
the war, and probably defeat the object. I do not
think it wise to provoke a civil war beginning at
Charleston and in rescue of an untenable position.
Therefore, I advise against the expedition In every
view. . . .
Mr. Chase wrote:
I am clearly in favor of maintaining Fort
Pickens, and just as clearly In favor of provisioning
Fort Sumter. . .
Mr. Welles said:
I concur in the proposition 'to send an armed force
off Charleston with supplies of provisions, and rein
forcements for the garrison of Fort Sumter. .
Mr. Smith answered:
. . Believing that Fort Sumter cannot be suc
cessfully defended, I regard its evacuation as a neces
sity, and I advise that Major Anderson's command
shall be unconditionally withdrawn. .
Me. Blair wrote:
It is acknowledged to be possible to relieve
Fort Sumter. It ought to be relieved without refer
ence to Pickens or any other possession. South Caro
lina is the head and front of this rebellion, and when
that State is safely delivered from the authority of
the United States it will strike a blow against our au
thority from which it will take years of bloody strife
to recover. . . .

THE CIV^L WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 185
Mr. Bates wrote:
[Believed in reinforcing Pickens, and] As to Fort
Sumter, I t£lnk the time Is come either to evacuate
or relieve it. — Lincoln's Works, II, pp. 26-28.
Read the following letter, and think what the
end was, and when it came, nay when it will
come: FOKT SuMTEB, S. C, April 12, 1861.-3:20 A. m.
Sib: By authority of Brigadier-General Beauregard
commanding the Provisional Forces of the Confederate
States, we have the honor to notify you that he will
open the fire of his batteries on Fort Sumter In one
hour from this time.
We have the honor to be, very respectfully, your
obedient servants, James Chestnet, Jk.,
Aid-de-Camp.
Stephen D. Lee,
Captain C. S. Army, Aid-de-Camp.
Maj. Robert Andeeson,
V. S. Army, Commanding Fort Sumter.
— Rebellion Records, I, p. 14-
Congress met on the call of the president,
July 4. President Lincoln sent in his flrst mes
sage on that day. Some striking passages are
here quoted:
Lest there be some, uneasiness In the minds of can
did men as to what is to be the course of the govern
ment toward the Southern States after the rebellion
shall have been suppressed, the executive deems It
proper to say It will be his purpose then, as ever, to
be guided by the Constitution and the laws; and that
he probably will have no different understanding of
the powers and duties of the Federal Government
relatively to the rights of the States and the people,
under the Constitution, than that expressed In 'the
Inaugural address. — Lincoln's Message to Congress in
Special Session, July 4, 1861, Works, II, p, 65.
In the midst of the war, on November 19,
1863, President Lincoln made his Gettysburg
Address, an address which probably will live

186 AMERICAN KlSiOiti SxiJuiiiiS.
as long as the English language shall be
spoken or read.
Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought
forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in
liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men
are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing
whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and
BO dedicated, can long endure. We have come to dedi
cate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for
those who here gave their lives that that nation mig:ht
live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should
do this.
But In a larger sense we cannot dedicate — we cannot
consecrate — we cannot hallow — this ground. The
brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have
consecrated it far above our poor power to add or
detract. The world will little note nor long remem
ber what we say here, but it can never forget what they
did here. It Is for us, the living, rather, to be dedi
cated here to the unfinished work which they who
fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is
rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task
remaining before us — that from these honored dead
we take Increased devotion to that cause for which
they gave the last full measure of devotion; that we
here highly resolve that these dead shall not have
died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have
a new birth pf freedom; and that government of the
people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish
from tbe earth. — Works, II, p. 439.
THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION.
After citing part of the proclamation of Sep
tember 22, 1862, Lincoln says:
Nor, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the
United States, by virtue of the power In me vested as
commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the
United vUates, . and as a fit and necessary war
measure for suppressing said rebellion, do, on this first
day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand
eight hundred and sixty-three, and In accordance with
my purpose so to do, order and designate as

THE CIVIL WAE AND RECONSTRUCTION. 187
the States and parts of States wherein the people
thereol, respectively, are this day In rebellion against
the United States, the following, to-wIt [named]
And by virtue of the power, and for the purpose
aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held
as slaves within said designated States are
and henceforth shall be free. . .—Lincoln's Works,
II, pp. 287-88.
The great question of Reconstruction began
to agitate the minds of American statesmen as
early as 1862. Lincoln's first State paper on
this subject outlines his plans in a general way.
Other quotations from later papers, which fol
low, will show the development of his idea.
I recommend the adoption of a joint resolution by
your honorable bodies [of Congress], which shall be
substantially as follows:
Resolved, That the United States ought to co-operate
with any State which may adopt gradual abolishment
of slavery, giving to such State pecuniary aid, to be
used by such State, In its discretion, to compensate
for the Inconveniences, public and private, produced
by such change of system.
The Federal Government would find its highest in
terest in such a measure, as one of the most efficient
means of self-preservation. — Works, II, p. 129. [Both
branches of Congress adopted this resolution by large
majorities.] In December, 1862, Mr. Lincoln recommended
three resolutions to be adopted as amendments
to the Constitution. They were as follows:
I. "Every State wherein slavery now exists which
shall abolish the same therein at any time or times
before the first day of January In the year of our
Lord one thousand and nine hundred, shall receive
compensation from the United States [in United States
bonds] as follows  for each slave shown to have
been therein by the eighth census of the United States"
. [so many dollars].
The measure Is both just and economical. In a cer
tain sense the liberation of slaves is the destruction
of property — property acquired by descent or hy pur-

188 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
chase, the same as any other property. It Is no less
true for having been often said, that the people of the
South. are not more responsible for the original Intro
duction of this property than are the people of the
North; and when it is remembered how unhesitatingly
we all use cotton and sugar and share the profits of
dealing in them, it may not be quite safe to say that
the South has been more responsible than the North
for its continuance. If, then, for a common object
this property is to be sacrificed, is it not just that it
be done at a common charge?
II. "All slaves who shall have enjoyed actual free
dom by the chances of the war at any time before the
end of the rebellion, shall be forever free; but all
owners of such who shall not have been disloyal shall
be compensated for them at the same rates as are pro
vided for States adopting abolishment of slavery."
III. "Congress may appropriate money and other
wise provide for colonizing free colored persons, with
their own consent at any place or places without the
United States."
I cannot make it better known than it already is,
that I strongly favor colonization.
This plan is recommended as a means, not in ex
clusion of, but additional to, all others for restoring
and preserving the national authority throughout the
Union. The subject is presented exclusively in Its
economical aspect. The plan would, I am confldent,
secure peace more speedily, and maintain It more
permanently, than can be done by force alone; while
all It would cost, considering amounts, and manner
of payment, and times of payment, would be easier
paid than will be the additional cost of the war, il we
rely solely upon lorce. It Is much— very much — that
It would cost no blood at all. Other means
may succeed; this could not fail. The way Is plain,
peaceful, generous, just, . a way which, if fol
lowed, the world will forever applaud, and God must
forever hless.— Ibid, pp. 270-277.
And It is suggested as not improper that. In con
structing a loyal State government in any State, the
name of the State, the boundary, the subdivisions, the
constitution, and the general code of laws, as before
the rebellion, be maintained, subject only to the modi-

THE CIVIL WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 189
fications made necessary by the conditions hereinbe
fore stated, and such others, if any, not contravening
said conditions, and which may be deemed expedient. —
Lincoln's Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction,
Aug. 12, 1863, Works, II, p. 44-',.
The policy of emancipation, and of employing black
soldiers, gave to the future a new aspect, about which
hope, and fear, and doubt contended in uncertain con
flict. According to our political system, as a matter
of civil administration, the General Government had
no lawful power to effect emancipation in any State,
and for a long time It had been hoped that the re
bellion could be suppressed without resorting to it as
a military measure. It was all the wMle deemed
possible that the necessity for it might come, and
that if it should, the crisis of the contest would then
be presented. It came, and, as was anticipated. It
was followed by dark and doubtful days. Eleven
months having now passed, we are permitted to take
another review. The rebel borders are pressed still
further back. Maryland and Missouri, neither
of which three years ago would tolerate any restraint
upon the extension of slavery Into new Territories,
only dispute now as to the best mode of removing it
within their own limits. No servile insurrec
tion, or tendency to violence or cruelty, has marked
the measures of emancipation and arming the blacks.
These measures have been much discussed in loreign
countries, and contemporary with such discussion the
tone of public sentiment there is much improved.
.—Lincoln's Annual Message, Deo. 8, 1863, Works,
II, pp. 453, 454.
Lincoln's plan of Reconstruction, as formu
lated December, 1863, continued to be attacked
till the end of his life. Two days before his
death he made his last public address, which
was largely given over to a discussion of this
question. In part he said:
We meet this evening not in sorrow, but in gladness
of heart. The evacuation of Petersburg and Richmond,
and the surrender of the principal insurgent army,
give hope of a righteous and speedy peace, whose joy
ous expression cannot be restrained. . . .

190 AMEEIOAN HISTOEY STUDIES.
By these recent successes the relnauguration of th©
national authority — reconstruction— which has had a
large share of thought from the first, is pressed much
more closely on our attention. It is fraught with great
difficulty. . Nor Is it a small additional embar
rassment that we, the loyal people, differ among our
selves as to the mode, etc. . [He then discussea
what he has done In Louisiana.] [Concerning the
question whether the States were ever out of the
Union] I have purposely forborne any public expres
sion on it. As it appears to me, that question has not
been, not yet is, a practically material one. . .
We are all agreed that the seceded States, so-called,
are out of their proper practical relation with the
Union, and that the sole object of the government
is to again get them Into that proper practical
relation. I believe that it is not only possible, but in
fact easier, to do this without deciding or even con
sidering whether these States have ever been out of
the Union, than with It. Finding themselves safely
at home, it would be utterly immaterial whether they
had ever been abroad. . . .
I repeat the question: Can Louisiana be brought
into proper practical relation with the Union sooner
by sustaining or by discarding her new State govern
ment? ... So new and unprecedented Is the whole
case that no exclusive and inflexible plan can safely
be nrescribed as to details and collaterals. .
Important principles may and must be inflexible. In
the present situation, as the phrase goes, it may be
my duty to make some new announcement to the
people of the South. I am considering, and shall not
fail to act when satisfied that action will be proper.-^
Works, II,pp. 672-675.
EECONSTEUCTION UNDBE PEESIDENT JOHNSON.
President Johnson began on May 29, 1865,
to carry out a system of reconstruction which
he always claimed was the one Lincoln had
planned. On that date he issued an amnesty
proclamation to all those lately in rebellion,.
with fourteen excepted classes.
To the end, therefore, that the authority of the Gov-

THE CIVIL WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 191
ernment of the United States may be restored, and that
peace, order, and freedom may be established, [, An
drew Johnson, President of the United States, do
proclaim and declare that I hereby grant to all p3rsons
•who have, directly or Indirectly, participated in the
existing rebellion [exceptions] amnesty and pardon.
with restoration of all rights of property, except as to
slaves, . . upon the condition . . that such
person subscribe the following oath. I, 
 do solemnly swear that I will henceforth
faithfully support, protect, and defend the Constitution
of the United States. . . . — MoPherson, Reconstruc
tion, pp. 9-10.
On the same day he appointed William W.
Holden Provisional Governor of North Carolina,
with powers and duties as follows:
I, Andrew Johnson, do hereby ap
point William W. Holden Provisional Governor ol the
State of North Carolina, whose duty it shall be
to prescribe such rules and regulations as may be nec
essary and proper for convening a convention, [and
also] with authority to exercise . all the powers
necessary and proper to enable such loyal people of
the State . to restore said state to Its constitu
tional relations to the Federal Government.
Similar action was taken for the other States.
The president, by proclamation, also provided
for the recall of the proclamati»ns establish
ing martial law, blockade, the suspension of
the Habeas Corpus, etc. In other words, dur
ing the summer of 1865 he had taken almost
all the steps necessary to restore the States to
their "practical relation" to the Union, by De
cember, when Congress should come together.
Almost immediately on its assembling there
were signs that there was to be a struggle be
tween Congress and the President. However
the Congressional plan was not fully matured
and enacted into law before March 2, 1867. In
the meantime the State governments set up
under President Johnson's plan continued to

192 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
exist with some power, but subject to suspen
sion whenever Congress might direct. The
first part of the Congressional plan with which
the President agreed was the passage of the
13th amendment. The second part was the
14th amendment. The great struggle, how
ever, came over the following law, which con
tains the substance of the Congressional plan
of Reconstruction:
Wheeeas, No legal State governments or adequate
protection for life or property now exists in the rebel
States [named], therefore.
Be it enavted, etc.. That said rebel States shall be di
vided Into military districts and made subject to the
military authority of the United States . [Five
districts provided for.]
Sec. 2. That it shall be the duty of the President to
assign to the command of each of said districts an
officer of the army and to detail a sufficient
military lorce to enable such officer to perlorm his
duties and enlorce his authority.
Sec. 3. That it shall be the duty of each officer
to suppress insurrection, disorder and to this
end he may allow civil tribunals to take jurisdiction
of and to try offenders, or, when in his judgment it
may be necessary for the trial of offenders, he shall
have power to organize military commissions
lor that purpose.
Sec. 4. [Speedy trials and no unusual punishments.]
Sec. 5. That when the people ol any one ol the rebel
States shall have lormed a constitution ol government
In conlormlty with the Constitution ol the United
States In all respects, Iramed by a convention ol dele
gates elected by the male citizens ol said State, twenty-
one years old and upward, ol whatever race, color, or
previous condition, except such as may be
dislranchlsed for participation in the rebellion,
and when such constitution shall provide that the
elective franchise shall be enjoyed by all such per
sons as have the qualifications herein stated for elec
tors , . and when ratified by a majority vote
[accepted by Congress] and when said State .
shall have adopted the amendment, . known as
fourteen, and when said article shall have become a

THB CIVIL WAE AND EECONSTEUCTION. 193
part of the Constitution of the United States
[then the State admitted to privileges of other States],
Seo. 6. [Any existing government provisional only.
. .. .] — MoPherson, Reconstruction, pp. 191, 192.
This bilj and all other supplementary bills
were vetoed by President Johnson, but all were
passed over his veto, and thus became the law
of the land. By 1870, under the series of acts
of which the one cited is the most important,
all the rebel States were again in full operation,
and represented in Congress. The flnal outcome
of the struggle was the impeachment of Presi
dent Johnson. The Senate failed to convict.
Congress triumphed, however, in its policy.
QUESTIONS.
1. Was Lincoln anxious to avoid war? 2. Point out
the real difference he notes between the North and
the South. 3. Did he wish the Republicans to yield
their ground? 4. Was it possible for the two sections
to agree? 5. What phrase had Lincoln used before
this to characterize the nature of the struggle? 6. How
had Seward characterized It? 7. How did Lincoln feel
toward the South? 8. Give quotations to prove your
position. 9. What would be "coercion" of a State ac
cording to Lincoln? 10. What did he think the nation
might do? 11. How did Lincoln mean to treat slavery
In the States? 12. What did he mean by leaving them
alone? 13. Did Lincoln seem to think war was neces
sary? 14. What was the matter? 15. What advice
did he give to the people of North and South? 16.
Could they take it? 17. Are Lincoln's positions, in
these extracts and in those given last month consistent
with one another?
1. How did President Buchanan explain the troubles?
2. How could the difficulties be settled? 3. Did he be
lieve then in the "irrepressible conflict" doctrine? 4.
Which proved to be right? 5. Did he believe the South
might secede on account of President Lincoln's elec
tion? 6. Did he recognize the right of secession at all?
7. How could the States get a redress of grievances?
8. Should anything be done to permit secession? 9.
Why not? 10. How did he propose to settle the
trouble? 11. Compare ideas of Lincoln and Buchanan.
1. What State passed the first Ordinance of Seces
sion? 2. What relation to the action of the State in
1788? 3. Who acted for the State? 4. Apparently did
the State expect war? 5. If not, why not? 6. What
did the State offer to do? 7. What was to be the
future relation? 8. Judged by the extracts given last

194 AMEEICAN HISTOEY STUDIES.
month, why did secession take place? 9. What at
tempt did Virginia mak^ to prevent secession? 10.
How far were many of the Republicans, Lincoln In
cluded, ready to go to prevent war? 11. Compare the
proposed Thirteenth amendment with the existing
one. 1. How did Lincoln attempt to satisfy the Soutn that
secession was not justifiable? 2. How did he propose
to treat them? 3. Who would be responsible lor war
il It came? 4. Commit the last paragraph of his In
augural. 5. Can you find another paragraph more elo
quent than this?
1. How did the Cabinet feel in regard to aiding Fort
Sumter? 2. Why such feelings? 3. Any changes in
sentiment between March 15 and March 29? 4. What
is the most important letter in this number? Why?
1. How did Lincoln propose to treat the Southern
States after the Rebellion was suppressed? 2. What
Important thought In the Gettysburg speech? 3. Un
der what power did Lincoln claim the right to issue
the Emancipation Proclamation? 4. Would Congress
have had the same right? 5. How did Lincoln propose
to secure the abolishment of slavery? 6. When would
slavery have been ended by his plan? 7. What argu
ments did he use to sustain his plan? 8. How did the
country first receive the Emancipation Proclamation?
9. What did Lincoln believe In regard to the States
having ever been out of the Union? 10. When did
Lincoln last speak concerning Reconstruction? 11.
What policy did President Johnson claim to follow in
regard to Reconstruction? 12. What was the great
difference between the Congressional plan of Recon
struction and President Johnson's? 13. What do you
understand by Reconstruction? 14. Name the prin
cipal elements In the Congressional plan. 15. Who
could vote In reconstructing the seceded States undei
President Johnson's plan under the Congressional
plan? 16. Write an essay on President Lincoln in the
war, using only the material here given.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES—
Monthly ; 25c per year.
EUROPEAN HISTORY STUDIES—
Monthly ; 25c per year.
STUDIES IN EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN
HISTORY-
SB? pp. ; cloth. Fling AND Caldwell. $1.00.

AINSWORTH & COMPANY,
378-388 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, 111.

American History Studies

No. 10.

MAY, 1898.

A Study in American Foreigi^ Relations and
Diplomacy.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W. CALDWELL,
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA.

J. H. MILLER, Publisher,
LINCOLN, NEBRASKA.

Yearly Subscription, 25 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

Published Monthly, Except July and August.
liiiiered as second-class matter at the Post Office, Lincoln, Nebraska.
D. S. A.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

A STUDY IN AMERICAN FOREIGN RELA
TIONS AND DIPLOMACY.
^TNCE 1815 the development of American
political history has been only slightly
modified by foreign influences. To a great
extent the reason for this may be found in the
geographical situation of the United States.
Separated by wide oceans from any other im
portant nation, they have been enabled to
pursue a self-directive course, almost as freely
as if located on an island in the midst of the
sea. American diplomatic history may be said
to begin on November 29, 1775, when a motion
was made to appoint a committee to correspond
with "our friends in England and elsewhere."
At the moment of writing this introduction our
nation is in the midst of the excitement due toi
the Cuban question, and the imminence of war
with Spain on account of it. In 1775 Spain
looked upon us as a band of rebels, if she con
descended to think of us at all. Now the
United States has more than four times the
population, and many times the wealth, of the
haughty nation which then owned and con
trolled the larger part of this western hemi
sphere. The importance and complexity of the
problems arising from our foreign relations in
1776 were almost as nothing compared with
those that confront us to-day; yet it is un
doubtedly true that the course of our develop
ment then was much more influenced by our
diplomatic policy than it is now. The really
great problems are internal ones, and the Amer-

FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY. 197
ican people should ever remember this. The
diplomatists as well as the statesmen of the
Revolutionary period were men of vigor and
power. Franklin, Jay, J. Adams, and Jefferson
proved themselves able to meet on equal terms
the best men that France and England pos
sessed. A little later we find Clay, J. Q. Adams,
and especially A. Gallatin, contending with the
English ambassadors over the terms of the
treaty of peace in 1814, and winning for our
nation a decided victory. Monroe and Adams
in the events connected with the promulgation
of the so-called Monroe doctrine proved them
selves able and skilled diplomatists. Webster,
in the Webster-Ashburton treaty of 1842. gained
the good will of Europe for the skill and dignity
with which he managed the American cause.
It is possible in one article to touch only a
very few of the many events in which our nation
has come into contact with other nations. I
have chosen to take a few impoa?tant points and
give them a fuller treatment, rather than to
attempt to cover the whole ground. The reader,
therefore, must remember that these extracts
do not touch even many of the most interesting
questions which have confronted our statesmen
in the past. Yet it is hoped that they may
arouse an interest so that more of the docu
mentary matter pertaining to our external rela
tions may be called for and used.
November 29, 1775, congress passed the fol
lowing resolution, which may be said to be the
first word ever uttered by the American people
with regard to foreign affairs:
ResolveA, That a committee of five he appointed for
the sole purpose of corresponding with our friends in
Great Britain, Ireland, and other parts of the world;
and that they lay their correspondence before Con
gress when directed.
The members chosen were Mr. Harrison, Dr. Frank-

198 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
lin, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Dickinson, and Mr. Jay. — Secret
Journals of the Congress of the Confederation, vol. II,
p. 5.
We next find our diploanatic history set forth
in the resolutions which follow:
[June 11, 1776.] Resolved, That a committee be ap
pointed to prepare a plan of treaties to be proposed to
foreign powers. — Ibid, p. 4f5.
[September 17, 1776.] Congress took into considera
tion the plan of treaties to be proposed to foreign
nations, with the amendments agreed to by the com
mittee of the whole; and thereupon.
Resolved, That the following plan of a treaty be
proposed to his most christian majesty: [Plan.] —
Ibid, p. 6.
Resolved, That Thursday next be assigned for ap
pointing commissioners to transact the business of
the United States at the court of Prance. — Ibid, p. 31.
Resolved, That three be appointed. The ballots be
ing taken, Mr. B. Franklin, Mr. S. Deane, and Mr. T.
Jefferson, were elected. — Ibid, p. 31.
[September 28, 1776.] Resolved, That the commis
sioners should live in such a style and manner, at the
court of Prance, as they may find suitable and neces
sary to support the dignity of their publick character,
keeping an account of their expenses, which shall be
reimbursed by the Congress of the United States of
America. — Ibid, p. 33.
The first alliance made by the United States
contains, among others, the following clauses:
The most christian king, and the United States of
North America having this day concluded a
treaty of amity and commerce, have thought
it necessary to take into consideration the means of
strengthening those engagements, and of rendering
them useful to the safety and tranquility of the two
parties; particularly in case Great Britain, in resent
ment should break the peace with France.
. And his majesty and the United States, having
resolved, in that case, to join their counsels and ef
forts against the enterprises of their common enemy.

FOREIGN RELATIONS AN'D DIPLOMACY. 199
have concluded and determined on
th« following articles:
Art. II. The essential and direct end of the pres
ent defensive alliance is, to maintain effectually the
liberty, sovereignty, and independence absolute and
unlimited of the said United States, as well in matters
of government as of commerce.
Art. XI. The two parties guarantee, mutually, from
the present time and forever, against all other powers,
to-wit, the United States to his most christian majesty,
the present possessions of the crown of France in
America, as well as those which it may acquire by the
future treaty of peace; and his most christian majesty
guarantees, on his part, to the United States, their
liberty, sovereignty, and independence, absolute and
unlimited, as well in matters of government as of com
merce, and also their possessions, and the additions
or conquests that their confederation may obtain dur
ing the war, from any of the dominions now or here
tofore possessed by Great Britain in North America,
the whole as their possession shall be affixed
and assured to the said states at the moment of the
cessation of their present war with England.
Done at Paris, this 6th day of February, one thou
sand seven hundred and seventy-eight.
C. A. Gerard, [l. s.] B. Franklin, [l. s.]
Silas Deane. [l. s.]
Arthur Lee. [l. s.]
— Secret Journal of Congress, vol. II, pp. 82, 86, 8S.
The extracts below from the treaty of peace
of 1783 will give much valuable information if
duly studied:
In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.
It having pleased the Divine Providence to dispose
the hearts of King George the Third,
and of the United States of America, to forget all past
misunderstandings have agreed upon and
confirmed the following articles:
Art. I. His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the

200 amekicax history stt:i)ibs.
United States, viz.: New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut,
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Mary
land, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia, to be free, sovereign, and independent States;
that he treats with them as such; and for himself, his
heirs and successors, relinquishes all claims to the
government, propriety, and territorial rights of the
same, and every part thereof.
Art. VII. The navigation of the river Mississippi,
from its source to the ocean, shall forever remain free
and open to the subjects of Great Britain, and the
citizens of the United States.
(Signed.) D. Hartley.
John Adams.
B. Franklin.
John Jay.
—United Htatc.^ Statutes at Large, vol. Till, pp. 81, 8.i.
The treaty of peace of 1783 was completed
only after a long and intense struggle between
the commissioners of the two countries. John
Adams, in his diary, has left us a clear picture
of the daily life and disputes, not only between
the English and American commissioners, but
also among the American commissioners them
selves. The negotiations had to do with many
subjects. These extracts in regard to the right
to fish oif the banks of Newfoundland introduce
us to their daily "squabbles" as well as any
that may be chosen:
Upon the return of the other gentlemen, Mr.
Strachey proposed to leave out the word "right" of
fishing, and make it "liberty." Mr. Fitzherbert said
the word "right" was an obnoxious expression. Upon
this I rose up and said, "Gentlemen, is there or can
there be a clearer right? In former treaties, that of
Utrecht and that of Paris, — France and England have
claimed the right, and used the word. When God
Almighty made the banks of New Foundland, at three
hundred leagues distance from the people of America,
and at six hundred leagues distance from those of

FOREIG.N RELATION'S AM) DII'LOJIAC Y. 201
France and England, did He not give as good a right
to the former as to the latter? If Heaven in the crea
tion gave a right it is ours at least as much as yours.
If occupation, use, and possession, give a right, we
have it as clearly as you. If war, and blood, and
treasure give a right, ours is as good as yours. We
have been constantly fighting in Canada, Cape Breton,
and Nova Scotia, for the defense of this fishing, and
have expended beyond all proportion more than you.
If, then, the right cannot be denied, why should it
not be acknowledged, and put out of dispute? Why
should we leave room for illiterate fishermen to
wrangle and chicane? — Life and Works of John Adams,
vol. Ill, pp. 33-3, 334-
I forgot to mention that, when we were upon the
fishery, and Mr. Strachey and Mr. Fitzherbert were
urging us to leave out the word "right" and substitute
"liberty," I told them at last, in answer to their pro
posal, to agree upon all other articles, and leave that
of the fishery to be adjusted at the definitive treaty. I
never could put my hand to any articles without sat
isfaction about the fishery; that Congress had, three
or four years ago, when they did me the honor to give
me a commission to make a treaty of commerce with
Great Britain, given me positive instructions not to
make any such treaty without an article in the treaty
of peace acknowledging our right to the fishery; that
I was happy that Mr. Laurens was now present, who,
I believed, was in Congress at the time, and must
remember it. Mr. Laurens upon this said, with great
firmness, that he was in the same case, and could
never give his voice for any articles without this. Mr.
Jay spoke up, and said, it could not be a peace, it
would only be an insidious truce without it. — Ibid,
p. 335.
I have not attempted, in these notes, to do justice
to the arguments of my colleagues, all of whom
were, throughout the whole business, when they at
tended, very attentive and able, especially Mr. Jay,
to whom the French, if they knew as much of his ne
gotiations as they do of mine, would very justly give
the title with which they have inconsiderately deco
rated me, that of "Le Washington de la negociation" : a
very fiattering compliment indeed, to which I have not

202 AlIBRICAX HISTORY STUDIES.
a right, but sincerely think it belongs to Mr. Jay.^
Ibid, p. 339.
The X. Y. Z. episode in American history is
perhaps \Nell known, but it is doubtful if many
of our students ever read an extract from the
letters of our ministers in France, — Pinckney,
Marshall, and Gerry, — which, when published,
roused the American people to the highest pitch
of excitement, and led to the production of "Hail
Columbia." Citizen Minister [Mr. Monroe] : I hasten to lay be
fore the Executive Directory the copies of your letters
of recall, and of the letter of credence of Mr. Pinck
ney, whom the President of the United States has ap
pointed to succeed you, in the quality of Minister
Plenipotentiary of the United States near the French
Republic. The Directory has charged me to notify
you "that it will not acknowledge nor receive another
Minister Plenipotentiary from the United States, until
after the redress of grievances demanded of the Ameri
can Government, and which the French Republic lisis
a right to expect from it." — Benton, Abridgment of De
bates in Congress, vol. II, p. 390.
The following extracts may make more evi
dent why the cry "Millions for defense, not a
cent for tribute," became such a phrase to con
jure with in the years 17!)7-1800:
In the evening of the same day, M. X called on
General Pinckney, and after having sat some time
whispered him that he had a message from
M. Talleyrand to communicate when he was at leisure.
General Pinckney immediately withdrew with him
into another room, and said that he had been
acquainted with M. Talleyrand, and that he
was sure that he had a great regard for [America]
and its citizens; and was very desirous that a recon
ciliation be brought about with France, that, to effect
that end, he was ready, if it was thought proper, to
suggest a plan, confidentially, that M. Talleyran'd
expected would answer the purpose. General Pinck
ney said he would be glad to hear it. M. X replied

FOKEIG.X RELATION'S AND DIPLOMACY. 203
that the Directory, and particularly two of the mem
bers of it, were exceedingly irritated at some passages
of the President's speech, and desired that they should
be softened, and that this step would be necessary
previous to our reception. That, besides this, a sum
of money was required for the pocket of the Directory
and Ministers, which would be at the disposal of M.
Talleyrand; and that a loan would also be insisted on.
M. X said if we acceded to these measures, M. Talley
rand had no doubt that all our differences with France
might be accommodated. On inquiry, M. X. could not
point out the particular passages of the speech that
had given offence, nor the quantum of the loan, but
mentioned that the douceur for the pocket was twelve
hundred thousand livres, about fifty thousand pounds
sterling.- — Ibid, p. 393.
About twelve we received another visit from M.
X. He immediately mentioned the great event an
nounced in the papers, and then said, that some pro
posals from us had been expected on the subject on
which we had before conversed; that the Directory
were becoming impatient, and would take a decided
course with regard to America, if we could not soften
them. M. X. again expatiated on the power and violence
of France; he urged the danger of our situation, and
pressed the policy of softening them, and of thereby
obtaining time. M. X. again returned to the subject
of money. Said he, you do not speak to the point; it
is money; it is expected that you will offer money.
We said that we had spoken to that point very ex
plicitly; we had given an answer. No, said he, you
have not; what is your answer? We replied no; no;
not a sixpence.— Oc*. 27, 1797.— Ibid, p. 395.
This extract from McMaster's "History of the
American People" shows the excitement, and
narrates the events which led to the production
of "Hail Columbia":
Politics ruled the hour. The city was full
of excited Federalists, who packed the theatre night
after night for no other purpose that to shout them
selves hoarse over the "President's March." He [the

204 A.MERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
player at the theatre] determined to make use of this
fact. He would take the March, find some one to write
a few patriotic stanzas to suit it, and, on the night
of his benefit, sing them to the house. Some Federal
ists were consulted, were pleased with the idea, and
named Joseph Hopkinson as the best man fitted to
write the words. He consented and in a few hours
"Hail, Columbia" was produced. — McMuster, History of
the People of the United States, vol. II, p. 378.
This is an example of the "poetry" that the
X. Y Z. affair called forth. There is an abun
dance of like matter in the newspapers of the
day: The President, with good intent,
Three envoys sent to Paris,
But Cinq Tetes would not with 'em treat,
Of honor France so base is.
Yankee Doodle (mind the tune)
Yankee Doodle Dandy.
If Frenchmen come
We'll spank 'em hard and handy.
Thro' X. and Y., and Madame Sly,
They made demand for money;
For, as we're told, the French love gold
As stinging bees love honey.
Chorus.
Bold Adams did in '76
Our Independence sign, sir.
And he will not give up a jot,
Tho' all the world combine, sir.
Chorus. — Ibid, p. 3S'i.
^'N'e may get a few thoughts in regard to the
<auses of the war of ]Sli> from the mes.sage of
President Madison of June 1, 1.S12, sent toC'lon-
gress recounting the acts of the British govern
ment during the years 1S03-1S12. He savs, in
part :
British cruisers have been in the continued practice
of violating the American flag on the great highway

FOREIGN RBLATIO.XS AND DIPLOMACY. 205
of nations, and of seizing and carrying off persons
sailing under it, not in the exercise of a belligerent
right founded on the law of nations against an enemy,
but of a municipal prerogative over British subjects.
British cruisers have been in the practice also of
violating the rights and the peace of our coasts. They
hover over and harass our entering and departing
commerce. To the most insulting pretensions they
have added the most lawless proceedings in our very
harbors, and have wantonly spilt American blood
within the sanctuary of our territorial jurisdiction.
Under pretended blockades, without the presence
of an adequate force and sometimes without the prac
ticability of applying one, our commerce has been
plundered in every sea, the great staples of our country
have been cut off from their legitimate markets, and
a destructive blow aimed at our agricultural and mari
time interests.
Such is the spectacle of injuries and indignities
which have been heaped on our country, and such the
crisis which its unexampled forbearance and concilia
tory efforts have not been able to avert.
Other counsels have prevailed. Our moderation and
conciliation have had no other effect than to encourage
perseverance and to enlarge pretensions. We behold
our seafaring citizens still the daily victims of lawless
violence, committed on the great common and high
way of nations, even within sight of the country which
owes them protection.
Whether the United States shall continue passive
under these progressive usurpations and these accumu
lating wrongs, or, opposing force to force in defense
of their national rights shall commit a just cause into
the hands of the Almighty Disposer of events, avoid
ing all connections which might entangle it in the
contest or views of other powers, and preserving a con
stant readiness to concur in an honorable re-estab
lishment of peace and friendship, is a solemn question
which the Constitution wisely confides to the legis-

206 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
lative department of the Government. In recom
mending it to their early deliberations I am happy in
the assurance that the decision will be worthy the
enlightened and patriotic councils of a virtuous, a
free, and a powerful nation. — Richardson, Messages and
Papers of the Presidents, vol. I, pp. 500, 504.
Henry Clay, in a speech in the House of Rep
resentatives on the New Army Bill, January 8,
1813, gives us a good picture of the point of
view of the "Young Republicans" of the West
and South:
The war was declared, because Great Britain arro
gated to herself the pretension of regulating our for
eign trade, under the delusive name of retaliatory or
ders in council — a pretension by which she undertook
to proclaim to American enterprise, "thus far shalt
thou go and' no further" — orders which she refused to
revoke, after the alleged cause of their enactment had
ceased; because she persisted in the practice of im
pressing American seamen; because she had instigated
the Indians to commit hostilities against us; and be
cause she refused indemnity for her past injuries upon
our commerce. I- throw out of the question other
wrongs. The war in fact was announced, on our part,
to meet the war which she was waging on her part.
So undeniable were the causes of the war, so power
fully did they address themselves to the feelings of the
whole American people, that when the bill was pend
ing before this house, gentlemen in the opposition,
although provoked to debate, would not, or could not,
utter one syllable against it. — Mallory, Life of Clay,
vol. I, p. 304.
And who is prepared to say, that American seamen
shall be surrendered as victims to the British princi
ple of impressment? And, sir, what is this principle?
She contends, that she has a right to the services of
her own subjects, and that, in the exercise of this
right, she may lawfully impress them, even although
she finds them in American vessels, upon the high
seas, without her jurisdiction. Now I deny that she
has any right, beyond her jurisdiction, to come on
board our vessels, upon the high seas, for any other
purpose, than in pursuit of enemies, or their goods,

FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY. 207
or goods contraband of war. But she further contends,
that her subjects cannot renounce their allegiance to
her, and contract a new obligation to other sover
eigns. I do not mean to go into the general question
of the right of expatriation. If, as is contended, all
nations deny it, all nations at the same time admit and
practice the right of naturalization. Great Britain
herself does this. Great Britain, in the very case of
foreign seamen, imposes, perhaps, fewer restraints
upon naturalization than any other nation. Then, if
subjects cannot break their original allegiance, they
may, according to universal usage, contract a new
allegiance. What is the effect of this double obliga
tion? Undoubtedly, that the sovereign, having pos
session of the subject, would have the right to the
services of the subject. — Ibid, p. 307.
If Great Britain desires a mark by which she can
know her own subjects, let her give them an ear mark.
The colors that float from the mast-head should be
the credentials of our seamen. There is no safety to
us, and the gentlemen have been shown it, but in the
rule, that all who sail under the flag (not being ene
mies) are protected by the flag. It is impossible that
this country should ever abandon the gallant tars,
who have won for us such splendid trophies. — Ibid,
p. 308.
The disasters of the war admonish us, we are told,
of the necessity of terminating the contest. If our
achievements by land have been less splendid than
those of our intrepid seamen by water, it is not be
cause the American soldier is less brave. On the
one element, organization, discipline, and a thorough
knowledge of their duties, exist, on the part of the
ofiicers and their men. On the other, almost every
thing is yet to be acquired. We have, however, the
consolation that our country abounds with the richest
materials, and that in no instance, when engaged in
action, have our arms been tarnished. — Ibid, p. 312.
What cause, Mr. Chairman, which existed for de
claring the war has been removed? We sought in
demnity for the past and security for the future. The
orders in council are suspended, not revoked; no com
pensation for spoliations; Indian hostilities, which
were before secretly instigated, are now openly en-

208 amei!I(;an history sttdies.
couraged; and the practice of impressment unremit
tingly persevered in and insisted upon. Yet the ad
ministration has given the strongest demonstrations
of its love of peace. On the twenty-ninth of June,
less than ten days after the declaration of war, the
secretary of the state writes to Mr. Russell, authoriz
ing him to agree to an armistice, upon two conditions
only, and what are they? That the orders in council
should be repealed, and the practice of impressing
American seamen cease, those already impressed being
released. The proposition was for nothing more than
a real truce; that the war should in fact cease on both
sides. — Ibid, p. 313.
No, sir, the administration has erred in the steps
which it has taken to restore peace, but its error has
been, not in doing too little, but in betraying too great
a solicitude for that event. An honorable peace is
attainable only by an efficient war. My plan would be
to call out the ample resources of the country, give
them a judicious direction, prosecute the war with
the utmost vigor, strike wherever we can reach the
enemy, at sea or on land, and negotiate the terms of
peace at Quebec or Halifax. We are told that Eng
land is a proud and lofty nation, which, disdaining to
wait for danger, meets it half way. Haughty as she
is, we once triumphed over her, and, if we do not listen
to the councils of timidity and despair, we shall again
prevail. In such a cause, with the aid of Providence,
we must come out crowned with success, but if we
fail, let us fail like men, lash ourselves to our gallant
tars, and expire together in one common struggle,
fighting for Free Trade and Seamen's Rights. — Ibid,
p. SI4.
The Seminole war and Jackson's invasion of
Florida in 1817-18 led ultimately to political
animositic-^s among American statesmen that in
fluenced in no slight manner the development
of its political history. The following extracts
from Clay's speeches on the Seminole war will
throw some light on the hatred which in later
years existed between him and (leneial Jackson.
In part he said, January 17. 1S19:

foreign RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY. 209
General Jackson says that when he received that
letter, he no longer hesitated. No, sir, he did no
longer hesitate. He received it on the twenty-third,
he was in Pensacola on the twenty-fourth, and imme
diately after set himself before the fortress of San
Carlos de Barancas, which he shortly reduced. Veni,
vidi, vici. Wonderful energy! Admirable prompti
tude! Alas, that it had not been an energy and a
promptitude within the pale of the Constitution and
according to the orders of the chief magistrate. — Mal
lory, Life of Clay, vol. I, p. 440.
That the President thought the seizure of the Span
ish posts was an act of war, is manifest through his
opening message, in which he says that, to have re
tained them, would have changed our relations with
Spain, to do which the power of the executive was
incompetent, Congress alone possessing it. The Presi
dent has, in this instance, deserved well of his coun
try. He has taken the only course which he could
have pursued, consistent with the Constitution of the
land. And I defy the gentleman to make good both
his positions, that the general was right in taking, and
the President right in giving up, the posts. — Ibid,
p. 441-
Recall to your recollection the free nations which
have gone before us, where are they now?
"Gone glimmering through the dreams of things that
were,
A school boy's tale, the wonder of an hour."
And how have they lost their liberties?
I hope not to be misunderstood; I am far from
intimating that General Jackson cherishes any de
signs inimical to the liberties of the country. I be
lieve his intentions to be pure and patriotic. I thank
God that he would not, but I thank Him still more that
he could not if he would, overturn the liberties of the
republic. But precedents, if bad, are fraught with
the most dangerous consequences. — Ibid, p. 443.
I hope our happy form of government is to be per
petual. But, if it is to be preserved, it must be by
the practice of virtue, by justice, by moderation, by
magnanimity, by greatness of soul, by keeping a

210 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
watchful and steady eye on the executive; and, above
all, by holding to a strict accountability the military
branch of the public force.
Beware how you forfeit this exalted character.
Beware how you give a fatal sanction, in this infant
period of our republic, scarcely yet two score years
old, to military insubordination. Remember tha.t
Greece had her Alexander, Rome her Caesar, England
her Cromwell, France her Bonaparte, and that if we
would escape the rock on which they split, we must
avoid their errors. — Ibid, p. 444.
The purchase of Florida was not made with
out a word of criticism concerning its terms
from Clay. In a speech on the treaty. April .3,
]820, he uses these words:
We wanted Florida, or rather we shall want it; or,
to speak more correctly, we want nobody else to have
it. We do not desire it for immediate use. It fills a
space in our imagination, and we wish it to complete
the arrondissement of our territory. It must certainly
come to us. The ripened fruit will not more surely
fall. Florida is enclosed in between Alabama and
Georgia, and cannot escape. Texas may. Whether
we get Florida now, or some five or ten years hence,
it is of no consequence, provided no other power gets
it. — Mallory, p. 457.
The next [proposition] was, that it was inexpedient
to cede Texas to any foreign power. They constituted,
in his opinion, a sacred inheritance of posterity, which
we ought to preserve unimpaired. He wished it was,
if it were not, a fundamental and inviolable law of the
land, that they should be inalienable to any foreign
power. It was quite evident that it was In the order
of Providence; that it was an inevitable result of the
principle of population, that the whole of this conti
nent, including Texas, was to be peopled in process of
time. The question was, by whose race shall it be
peopled? In our hands it will be peopled by freemen
and the sons of freemen, carrying with them our lan
guage, oiir laws, and our liberties; establishing on the
prairies of Texas, temples dedicated to the simple and
devout modes of worship of God incident to our relig-

FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY. 211
ion, and temples dedicated to that freedom which we
adore next to Him. In the hands of others, it may be
come the habitation of despotism and of slaves, sub
ject to the vile dominion of the inquisition and of
superstition.— /6i(J, p. 459.
The Monroe Doctrine, so-called, has become
so vast that a volume is needed to present it in
its entirety. However, it is believed that the
following extracts taken from the messages of
the Presidents and other documents will serve
to throw more light on the subject than can be
obtained from our ordinary school history,
hence they are given in the hope tliat every
teacher will try to find more illustrative matter.
The first extracts are from the articles of agree
ment of the members of the Holy Alliance :
Their Majesties the Emperor of Austria, the King of
Prussia, and the Emperor of Russia, in consequence ot
the great events [of years 1789-1815] have,
therefore, agreed to the following articles:
Art. I. In conformity to the words of the Holy Scrip
tures, which command all men to regard one another
as brethren, the three contracting monarchs will re
main united by the bonds of a true and indissoluble fra
ternity; and they will lend one another
assistance, aid, and support; and, regarding the subjects
and armies, as the fathers of their families, they will
govern them in the spirit of fraternity with which they
are animated, for the protection of religion, peace, and
justice. Art. II. Therefore, the only governing principle be
tween the above mentioned governments
shall be that of rendering reciprocal services; of testi
fying, the mutual affection with which they
ought to be animated; of considering all as only the
members of one Christian nation, the three allied
powers looking upon themselves as delegated by Provi
dence to govern three branches of the same family, to-
wit: Austria, Prussia, and Russia, confessing
that the Christian nations have really no
other sovereign than Him to whom alone power be
longs of right. Their majesties, therefore,
recommend, to fortify themselves every day

212 .AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
more and more in the principles and exercise of the
duties which the Divine Savior has pointed out to us.
Art. III. All powers which wish solemnly to profess
the sacred principles which have delegated this act,
and who shall acknowledge how important it is to the
happiness of nations, too long disturbed, that these
truths shall henceforth exercise upon human destinies,
all the infiuence which belongs to them, shall be re
ceived with as much readiness as affection, into this
holy alliance. — Cited in Anteriran Diphtnuiei/. S/ioir,
p. 243.
In 1822, at a congress held at Verona, the
Holy Allies added secretly the following clauses
to their articles of agreement cited above:
The undersigned, specially authorized to make some
additions to The Treaty of the Holy Allianee,
have agreed as follows:
Art. I. The high contracting powers being con
vinced that the system of represeiitntive government is
equally as incompatible with the monarchical princi
ples as the maxim of the sovereignty of the people
with the divine right, engage mutually, to
use all their efforts to put an end to the system of
representative governments, in whatever country it
may exist in Europe, and to prevent its being intro
duced in those countries where it is not yet known.
Art. II. As it cannot be doubted that the liberty of
the press is the most powerful means used by the pre
tended supporters of the rights of nations, to the detri
ment of those Princes, the high contracting parties
promise reciprocally to adopt all proper measures to
suppress it, not only in their own states, but, also, in
the rest of Europe. — Snow, American Diplomacy, p. ,?.(.3.
The Monroe Doctrine may be seen to have
been foreshadowed long before its official pro
mulgation by ^Monroe bv a perusal of the fol
lowing quotation:
Our detached and distant situation invites and en
ables us to pursue a different course. If we remain
one people, under an efficient government, the period
is not far off when we may defy material injury from
external annoyance; when we may take such an atti-

FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY. 213
tude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time
resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when bel
ligerent nations, under the impossibility of making
acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving
us provocation; when we may choose peace or war as
our interests, guided by justice, shall counsel.— ir«67(-
ington's Farewell Address.
-lefferson, in 1808, speaks as follows:
We consider their interests and ours as the same,
and that the object of both must be to exclude all
European influence from this hemisphere. — Jefferson's
Works, vol. V, p. 381.
In 1823 Jeft'erson writes to Monroe in these
words: Our first and fundamental maxim should be, never
to entangle ourselves in the broils of Europe. Our
second, never to suffer Europe to intermeddle with cis-
Atlantic affairs. America, North and South, has a
set of interests distinct from those of Europe, and
peculiarly her own. She should therefore have a sys
tem of her own, separate and apart from that of Eu
rope. While the last is laboring to become the domi
cile of despotism, our endeavor should surely be to
make our hemisphere that of freedom. — Jefferson's
Works, vol. VII, p. 315.
]\Ionroe formulates the doctrine in this way
in his celebrated mes.sage of December 2, 1823:
In the discussion to which this interest has given
rise, and in the arrangements by which they may
terminate, the occasion has been adjudged proper for
asserting, as a principle in which the rights and in
terests of the United States are involved, that the
American continents, by the free and independent
condition which they have assumed and maintain,
are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for
future colonization by any European powers. — Rich
ardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. II,
p. 207 f.
The political system of the allied powers is essen
tially different in this respect from that of America.
This difference proceeds from that which exists in
their respective governments. And to the defense of

214 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
our own, this whole nation is devoted. We
owe it, therefore, to candor, and to the amicable rela
tions existing between the United States and those
powers, to declare, that we should consider any at
tempt on their part to extend their system to any
portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace
and safety. — Ibid.
In the war between those new governments and
Spain, we declared our neutrality at the time of their
recognition, and to this we have adhered, and shall
continue to adhere, provided no change shall occur
which, in the judgment of the competent authorities
of this government, shall make a corresponding
change on the part of the United States indispensable
to their security. — Ibid.
It is impossible that the allied powers should extend
their political system to any portion of either con
tinent without endangering our peace and happiness;
nor can anyone believe that our southern brethren, if
left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord.
It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should be
hold such Interposition, in any form, with indiffer
ence. — Ibid.
President Cleveland, in his message to Con
gress December 17, 189.5, applied the Monroe
Doctrine to the Venezuelan question. Between
the farewell message of Washington and the
presient moment the idea has been in process of
development. Trace its evolution.
[It is claimed] that the reasons justifying an appeal
to the doctrine enunciated by President Monroe are
generally inapplicable "to the state of things in which
we live at the present day," and especially inapplica
ble to a controversy involving the boundary line be
tween Great Britain and Venezuela.
Without attempting extended arguments in reply
to this position, it may not be amiss to suggest that
the doctrine upon which we stand is strong and sound
because its enforcement is important to our peace and
safety as a nation and is essential to the integrity of
our free institutions and the tranquil maintenance
of our distinctive form of government. It was in-

FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY. 215
tended to apply to every stage of our national life and
cannot become obsolete while our republic endures.
It is also suggested in the British reply that we
should seek not to apply the Monroe doctrine to the
pending dispute, because it does not embody any
principle of international law which "is founded on
the general consent of nations."
Practically, the principle for which we contend has
peculiar if not exclusive relations to the United States.
It may not have been admitted in so many words to
the code of international law, but since in international
councils every nation is entitled to the rights belong
ing to it, if the enforcement of the Monroe doctrine
is something we may justly claim, it has its place in
the code of international law as certainly and securely
as if it were specifically mentioned. The
Monroe doctrine finds its recognition in those prin
ciples of international law which are based upon the
theory that every nation shall have its rights pro
tected and its just claims enforced.
Assuming, however, that the attitude of Venezuela
will remain unchanged, the dispute -has reached such
a stage as to make it now incumbent upon the United
States to take measures to determine with sufficient
certainty for its justification what is the true divis
ional line between the republic of Venezuela and Brit
ish Guiana.
In order that such an examination might be prose
cuted in a thorough and satisfactory manner, I suggest
that the Congress make an adequate appropriation
for the expenses of a commission to be appointed by
the executive who shall make the necessary investi
gation. When such report is made and ac
cepted it will, in my opinion, be the duty of the
United States to resist by every means in its power
as a wilful aggression upon its rights and interests
the appropriation by Great Britain of any lands or
the exercise of governmental jurisdiction over any
territory which after investigation we have deter
mined of right belongs to Venezuela.
I am, nevertheless, firm in my conviction that

216 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
while it is a grievous thing to contemplate the two
great English-speaking peoples of the world as being
otherwise than friendly competitors in the onward-
march of civilization and strenuous worthy rivals in all
the arts of peace, there is no calamity which a great
nation can invite which equals that which follows a
supine submission to wrong and injustice and the
consequent loss of national self-respect and honor
beneath which is shielded and defended a people's
safety and greatness. — Nebraska State Journal, Decem
ber 18, 1895. QUESTIONS.
1. Who acted as the flrst Secretaries of State for the
United States? 2. How were they chosen? 3. What
their duties? 4. How were treaties to be prepared?
5. Who were the first foreign ministers? 4. Who ap
pointed them? 7. How were they to live? 8. Why
were they to live in such a style? 9. With what na
tion did we form the first treaty? 10. What guaran
tees did France and the United States mutually make?
11. What was the leading object of the treaty?
1. What peculiar statements do you find in the treaty
of peace of 1783? 2. Who were acknowledged inde
pendent? 3. Find out why the navigation of the
Mississippi river was to remain forever free to both
nations. 4. How did John Adams feel in regard to
the fisheries. 5. Summarize his arguments. 6. Was
he ready to abandon the fisheries? 7. Whom did
Adams regard as the ablest of the commissioners?
8. What title had the French given him? 9. Did he
believe he deserved it?
1. Why was Mr. Monroe told that Prance did not in
tend to receive at present another minister from the
United States? 2. Find out who the Directory were.
3. Why the cry "millions for defense, not a cent for
tribute"? 4. Why the name X. Y. Z. to the difficulty
with France, 1798-'99? 5. How did "Hail Columbia"
come to be written? 6. What do you think of the
"poetry" of 1798? 7. What did the Americans evi
dently think of the French at this time? 8. Name the
causes of the war of 1812. 9. What does Clay mean
by British principle of impressment? 10. Could a per
son be a citizen of two states at once? 11. If so which
should protect him? 12. How did Clay feel in regard
to war? 13. How about making peace in 1813?
1. What had Jackson done that made Clay so sar
castic in his speech of January 17, 1819? 2. Did Clay
fear Jackson? 3. Where did he get his model for his
sentence beginning ¦ "Remember that Greece had her
Alexander," etc.? 4. Did Clay wish to purchase
Florida in 1820? 5. Was there any other territory
hie preferred; why?

FOREIGN RELATIONS AND DIPLOMACY. 217
1. What principles did the Holy Allies hold? 2.
Who were the Holy Allies? 3. Why had they formed
the holy alliance? 4. What principles of government
did the Holy Allies intend to destroy? 5. How did
they regard the liberty of the press? 6. Who flrst set
fbrth some of the ideas in the Monroe Doctrine? 7.
What idea does Jefferson add? 8. What did Jefferson
believe were the differences in government between
Europe and America? 9. What doctrines does Mon
roe set forth in his message of December 2, 1823? 10.
What did he mean by their "political system"? 11.
How did President Cleveland interpret the Monroe
Doctrine? 12. To what question did he apply it? 13.
Is is a part of international law? 14. Write a paper
on the growth of the Monroe Doctrine. 15. Is it appli
cable now to the Cuban issue?

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

This series will include the following numbers: (1) Early
Laws of Virginia, Massachusetts, and the Middle Colonies.
(2) The Founding of the Colonies. (3) Development of
Union Among the Colonies. (4) Steps Leading to the Revo
lution. (5) Development of the Constitution. (6) Growth
of Nationality. (7) Slavery. (8) Slavery. (9) Civil War
and Reconstruction. (10) Our Foreign Relations. (11)
Industrial Development. Monthly. Price, single copy, 5
cents. Ten or more copies of one number, 3 cents each.

EUROPEAN HISTORY STUDIES.

This series will include the following numbers : (1) The
Homeric Age. (2) The Athenian Constitution. (3) Spar
tan Life. (4) Alexander's Method of Warfare. (5) The
Achaean League. (6) The Roman Constitution. (7) Roman
Life of the First Punic War. (8) Roman Life of the Ju-
gurthine Period. (9) Roman Life Under the Empire. (10)
Roman Laws. Monthly. Price, single copy, 5 cents. Ten
or more copies of one number, 3 cents each.

THE NORTH WESTERN MONTHLY.

The North Western Mokthlt is a magazine devoted to
the correlation of all the educational forces of a community.
It advocates the source method of teaching history, and
contains each month articles from Professor F. M. Fling
and Professor H. W. Caldwell, University of Nebraska, on
Sources in American History, and Sources in European
History. Other Departments. — Studies in Municipal Government,
School Administration, Outside Educational Forces, Child
Study, Studies in English, etc.
Price 11.25 per year. Sample copy sent free.
Address J. H. MILLER, Publisher,
Lincoln, Nee.

American History Studies

No. 11.

JUNE, 1898.

A STUDY Ii\ ECONOMIC HISTORY.

SELECTIONS MADE FROM THE SOURCES

H. W. CALDWELL,
university of NEBRASKA.

J. H. MILLER, Publisher,
LINCOLN, NEBRASKA.

S"early Subscription, 25 cents. Single Copy, 5 cents.

PuBLisHLD Monthly, Except July and August.
Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office, Lincoln, Nebraska.
D. S. A.

AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.

(.x^ A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY.

^¦

¦^HIS last number of our studies for the
' :^ year will aim to give us a little insight
into the history of the tariff, and the
movement for internal improvements. It has
been ¦ thought better to conflne our study to
these two topics, so that the treatment might
be complete enough to give a fair idea of their
development, rather than to try to cover in a
less thorough manner the whole fleld. At the
best the matter selected can only be held to be
supplementary; however it is thought that few,
if any, of our ordinary school histories contain
as complete a treatment. Besides the chief
advantage claimed for these studies is not sO'
much that they give a greater amount of knowl
edge, but that they afford the means whereby
the student may be enabled to work out his
history to a great extent for himself. The
thought must be present, or the student cannot
do anything. He cannot be a mere memory
machine. These studies come down only to the time of
the civil war. By leaving out the more recent
years it has been hoped that prejudice might
play a less important part, and reason and calm
judgment a greater part. The tariff has been
treated in the main from the standpoint of pro
tection versus free trade. As this is still a con
troverted question, it needs to be handled with
care in order that the student may look at the
past from a fair and free minded standpoint.
The question of internal improvements has
passed so far into limbo that there seems to be

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 221
no danger in wrong ideas being gained by car
rying present prepossessions into a study of
past times.
I shall not outline these subjects in my intro
ductory remarks, for I believe the extracts and
the questions on them will accomplish the end
sought in the general summary; and thus the
results will be more completely the student's
own work. There is always present a tendency
in the pupil to find in the documents what the
. collator has found, or believes he has found.
In this number there will be no suggestions.
Each teacher, therefore, may work with his
pupils uninfluenced by any suggestions of mine.
I. The Tariff.
The following extracts from the laws of Eng
land will help us to understand the early feel
ing of the statesmen of the United States in
regard to any restrictions on the right to manu
facture and to trade.
[1699 it was declared to be] unlawful to load wool
upon any horse, cart, or other carriage.
[1750.] Whereas, The importation of bar iron from
His Majesty's colonies in America, into the port of Lon
don, will be a great advantage, not only to
the said colonies, but also to this kingdom, by furnish
ing the manufacturers of iron with a supply of that
useful and necessary commodity, and by means thereof
large sums of money, now annually paid for iron to
foreigners, will be saved to this Kingdom, and a greater
quantity of the woolen, and other manufactures of
Great Britain, will be exported to America, in exchange
for such iron so imported: . Be it therefore en
acted, etc.
Sec. IX. And that pig and bar iron made in his
Majesty's colonies in America may be further manufac
tured in this Kingdom; be it further enacted that
no mill -or other engine for slitting or rolling of
iron, or any plateing forge to work with a tilt hammer,
or any furnace for making steel, shall be erected, or
after such erection, continue in any part of his Majesty's
colonies in America. . . .

222 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
Sec. X. And it is hereby enacted that every
such mill, engine, forge, or furnace so erected or con
tinued contrary to the directions of this Act, shall be
deemed a common nuisance, and within thirty days
must be abated.— Oiteti in Elliott's Tariff Controversy,
p. 13. About 1760, when it was proposed by some to
restore Canada to France, Franklin protests
and uses the following argument to convince
the English manufacturing and commercial in
terests that it will be for their interests to
retain Canada. lit will be noticed that Frank"
lin speaks as an Englishman:
A people spread through the whole tract of country
on this side of the Mississippi, and secured by Canada
in our hands, would probably for some centuries find
employment in agriculture, and thereby free us at home
effectually from our fears of American manufactures.
Manufactures are founded in poverty.
But no man who can have a piece of land of his own
sufficient by his labor to subsist his family in plenty,
is poor enough to be a manufacturer and work for a
master. Hence while there is land enough in America
for our own people, there can never be manufactures
to any amount or value. — Franklin, Works, III, p. 86.
In 1776, in a letter to Mr. Hartley, in speak
ing of the terms of peace between England and
the United States, Franklin said:
Restraint on the freedom of commerce and inter
course between us can afford no advantage equivalent
to the mischief they will do by keeping up •ill-humor
and promoting a total alienation, — Works, VIII, p. 337.
In 1787 he wrote:
We shall, as you suppose, have imposts on trade and
custom-houses, not because other nations have them,
but because we cannot at present do without them.
When we are out of debt we may leave our
trade free, for our ordinary charges of government will
not be great. — Works, IX, p. 460.
Jefferson wrote in his "Notes on Virginia," in
1781, as follows:

a study in economic history. 223
Those who labor in the earth are the chosen people
of God, if ever he had a chosen people. . While
we have land to labor, then, let us never wish to see
our citizens occupied at bench work, or twirling a dis
taff. Carpenters, masons, and smiths, are wanting in
husbandry; but for the general operations of manu
facture, let our workshops remain in Europe. — Jefferson,
Works, VIII, p. 405.
Seven years later we find these words:
In general, it is impossible that manufactures should
succeed in America, from the high prices of labor.
This is occasioned by the great demand of labor for
agriculture. — Ibid, II, p. 412.
John Adams, in 1780, gives us this picture of
his expectations:
America is the country of raw materials, and of com
merce enough to carry them to a good market; but
Europe is the country for manufactures and commerce.
Thus Europe and America will be blessings to each
other, if some malevolent policy does not frustrate the
purposes 'of nature. — J. Adams' Works, VII, p. 309.
Let the following quotation answer whether
he believed this "malevolent policy" had
triumphed or not. On learning, in 1783, that
the English had forbidden all trade with the
British West Indies except in British vessels,
he wrote:
This proclamation is issued in full confidence that
the United States have no confidence in one another;
that they cannot agree to act in a body as one nation;
that they cannot agree upon any navigation act which
may be common to the thirteen States. Our proper
remedy would be to confine our exports to American
ships.— /6id, VIII, p. 97.
July 19, 1785, he wrot<e:
Whether prohibitions or high duties will be most
politic is a great question. — Ibid, p. 282.
August 10, of the same year, he wrote to Jay
as follows:
As the French court has condescended to adopt our

224 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
principle in theory, I am very much afraid we shall be
obliged to imitate their wisdom in practice [and import
only in our own vessels] . We have hitherto
been the bubbles of our own philosophical and equita
ble liberality; both France and England have
shown a constant disposition to take a selfish and
partial advantage of us because of them. I
hope we shall be the dupes no longer than we must.
I would venture upon monopolies and exclusions, if
they were found to be the only arms of defence
against monopolies and exclusions, without fear of
offending Dean Tucker or the ghost of Doctor Ques-
nay.— /Bid, 299.
A few days later he wrote in these words:
Patience under all the unequal burdens they impose
upon our commerce will do us no good; it will con
tribute in no degree to preserve the peace of this
country. On the contrary, nothing but retaliation,
reciprocal prohibitions and imposts, and putting our
selves in a posture of defence, will have any effect.
Confining exports to our own ships, and laying
on heavy duties upon all foreign luxuries, and en
couraging our own manufactures, appear to me to be
our only resource. — Ibid, 313, cited in Elliott, p. 52.
From the debate over the tariff act of 1789
we may quote some remarks which will still
further help us in understanding the spirit of
the time. Madison says:
I am a friend of free commerce, and at the same
time a friend to such regulations as are calculated to
promote our own interest, and this on national prin
ciples. . . I wish we were under less necessity
than I find we are, to shackle our commerce with
duties, restrictions, and preferences; but there are
cases in which it is impossible to avoid following
the example of other naticJns in the great diversity of
our trade. — Annals of Congress, I, pp. 192, 193.
During the course of the same debate Ames,
the leading Federalist from Massachusetts,
wrote these words to a friend:
The Senate has begun to reduce the rate of duties.

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 225
Rum is reduced one-third. Molasses from five
to four. I feel as Euceladus would if Etna was re
moved. The Senate, God bless them, as if designated
by Providence to keep rash and frolicksome brats out
of the fire, have demolished the absurd, unpolitic,
mad discriminations of foreigners in alliance, from
other foreigners. — Life of Fisher Ames, p. 45.
Hamilton, in his famous Report on Manufac
tures, 1792, after noting the arguments for
freedom of trade, expresses himself as follows:
This mode of reasoning is founded upon facts and
principles which have certainly respectable pretensions.
If it had governed the conduct of nations more gen
erally than it has done, there is room to suppose that
it might have carried them faster to prosperity and
greatness than they have attained by the pursuit of
maxims too widely opposite. Most general theories,
however, admit of numerous exceptions. . — State
Papers and Speeches on the Tariff, p. 3.
[After discussing the value of manufactures he says:]
The foregoing considerations seem sufficient to estab
lish, as general propositions, that it is the interest of
nations to diversify the industrial pursuits of the indi
viduals who compose them; that the establishment of
manufactures is calculated not only to increase the
general stock of useful and productive labor, but ever
to improve the state of agriculture in particular. ;
Ibid, p. 25.
[Again he says:] If the system of perfect liberty to
industry and commerce were the prevailing system of
nations, the arguments which dissuade a country in
the predicament of the United States from the zealous
pursuit of manufactures would, doubtless, have great
force. It will not be affirmed that they might not be
permitted, with few exceptions, to serve as a rule of
national conduct. In such a state pf things each coun
try would have the full benefi't of its peculiar advan
tages to compensate for its deficiencies or disadvan
tages. But the system which has been mentioned is far
from characterizing the general policy of nations.
The consequence of it is that the United States
are, to a certain extent, in the situation of a country

226 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
precluded from foreign commerce. In such a
position of things the United States cannot exchange
with Europe on equal terms, and the 'want of reci
procity would render them the victim ot a system
which should induce them to confine their views to
agriculture, and refrain from manufacture. — Ibid, pp.
28, 27.
Hamilton flnally sums up in several proposi
tions the advantages which he claims will be
secured to the country should it encourage the
development of manufactures.
There seems to be a moral certainty that the trade
of a country which is both manufacturing and agricult
ural will be more lucrative and prosperous than that
of a, country which is merely agricultural.
Another circumstance which gives a superiority of
commercial advantages to States that manufacture as
well as cultivate consists in the more numerous attrac
tions which a mere diversified market offers.
A third circumstance . has relation to the stag
nations of demand for certain commodities which at
some time or other interfere more or less with the sale
of all.
Not only the wealth, but the independence and se
curity of a country appear to be materially connected
with the prosperity of manufactures. . Our dis
tance from Europe, the great fountain of manufactured
supply, subjects us, in the existing state of things, to
inconvenience and loss in two ways [Bulkiness of com
modities and consequent cost of carriage].
If, then, it satisfactorily appears that it is the intent
of the United States generally to encourage manufac
tures, it merits particular attention, that there are
circumstances which render the present a critical mo
ment for entering with zeal upon the important busi
ness. .—Ibid,- pp.. 52, 53, 55, 56, 60.
Finally Hamilton suggests eleven means that
may be used to encourage the development of
manufactures :
(1.) Protective duties.
(2.) Prohibitions of rival articles, or duties equiva
lent to prohibitions.

A STUDY IN ECOXOMIC HISTORY. 227
(3.) Prohibitions of the exportation of the materials
of manufactures.
(4.) Pecuniary bounties [He especially approves of
bounties]. (5.) Premiums.
(6.) The exemptions of the materials of manufac
tures from duty.
(7.) Drawbacks on the duties which are imposed on
the materials of manufactures.
(8.) The encouragement of new inventions and dis
coveries. (9.) Judicious regulations for the inspection of manu
factured commodities.
(10.) The facilitating of pecuniary remittances from
place to place.
(11.) The facilitating of the transportation of com
modities. — Ibid, pp. 62-75.
February 12, 1816, Mr. A. J. Dallas, secretary
of the treasury, in obedience to a resolution of
the house of representatives, made a report on
"a general tariff of duties suitable to be im
posed on imported goods." In part he
said: There are few, if any, governments which do not
regard the establishment of domestic manufactures, as
a chief object of public policy.
The American manufactures may be satisfactorily
divided into three principal classes; First
class — Manufactures which are firmly and permanently
established, and which wholly, or almost wholly, sup
ply the demand for domestic use and consumption.
Second class — Manufactures which do not
but which, with proper cultivation, are capable of
being matured to the whgle extent of the demand.
Third class — Manufactures which are so slightly culti
vated, as to leave the demand of the country wholly,
or almost wholly, dependent upon foreign sources for
a siipply.[First class'\ — Duties might be freely imposed upon
the importation of similar articles, amounting wholly,
or nearly, to a prohibition, without endangering a
scarcity in the supply, or [exorbitant prices].

228 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
The second class of manufactures presents considera
tions of the most interesting, and not of the least em
barrassing nature, in the formation of a tariff,
for it is respectfully thought to be in the power of
the legislature, by a well-timed and well-directed pat
ronage, to place them, within a very limited period,
upon the footing which the manufactures of the first
class have been so happily placed, and it will
soon be understood that the success of the American
manufacture which tends to diminish the profit (often
¦ the excessive profit) of the importer, does not neces
sarily add to the price of the article in the hands of
the consumer.
The third class of manufactures does not require fur
ther attention than te adjust the rate of duty
to the amount of revenue which it is necessary to draw
from them. They have not yet been the objects of
American capital, industry, etc., ; and the
present policy of the government is directed to pro
tect, and not to create manufactures. — Niles Register,
pp. .^37-442.
In 1824 perhaps the greatest debate of early
years over the tariff took place between Clay on
the one side and Webster on the other. These
speeches ought to be read by every American
who wishes to be well informed concerning the
history of his country. Clay says, in part:
Two classes of politicians divide the people of the
United States. According to the system of one, the
produce of foreign industry should be subjected to no
other import than such as may be necessary to provide
a public revenue; and the produce of American in
dustry should be left to sustain itself, if it can, with no
other than that incidental protection, in its competi
tion, at home as well as" abroad, with rival foreign
articles. In casting our eyes around us the most prominent
circumstance which fixes our attention and challenges
our deepest regret is the general distress which per
vades the whole country.
What, again I would ask, is the cause of the unhappy

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 229
condition of our country which I have faintly depicted?
It is to be found in the fact that, during almost the
whole existence of this government, we have shaped
our industry, our navigation, and our commerce, in
reference to an extraordinary war in Europe, and to
foreign markets which no longer exist.
Our agricultural is our greatest interest. It ought
ever to be predominant. Can we do nothing to
invigorate it; ? We have seen the causes.
We have seen that an exclusive dependence
upon the foreign market must lead to still severer
distress. We must speedily adopt a genuine
American policy. Still cherishing the foreign market,
let us create also a home market.
The committee will observe, from the table, that the
measure of the wealth of a nation is indicated by the
measure of its protection of its industry; and that the
measure of the poverty of a nation is marked by that
of the diegree in which it neglects and abandons the
care of its own industry. Great Britain pro
tects most her industry, and the wealth of Great
Britain is consequently the greatest. — State Papers and
Speeches on the Tariff, pp. 253-275.
April 1 and 2 Mr. Webster replied to this
speech of Clay in perhaps the ablest speech
that he ever made on the tariff. A few ex
tracts Will indicate the scope of the argument:
We are represented as on the very verge and brink
of national ruin. So far from acquiescing in these
opinions, I believe there has been no period in which
the general prosperity was better secured, or rested
on a more solid foundation".
We have heard much of the policy of England, and
her example has been repeatedly urged upon us,
I took occasion the other day to remark, that more
liberal notions were growing prevalent on this sub
ject; that the policy of restraints and prohibitions was
getting out of repute, as the true nature of commerce
became better understood;

230 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
I have never said, indeed, that prohibitory laws did
not exist in England; we all know they do; but the
question is, does she own her prosperity and greatness
to these laws? I venture to say that such is not the
opinion of the public men now in England;
[Lord Lansdowne, in a recent speech in Parliament
said] "No axiom was more true than this: that it was
by growing what the territory of a country could
grow most cheaply, and by receiving from other coun
tries what it could not produce except at too great an
expense, that the greatest degree of happiness was to
be communicated to the greatest extent of population."
[Webster quoted this with approval, as he did another
statement that] "Some suppose that we have risen in
consequence of that system [the restrictive],' others,
of whom I am one, believe that we have risen in spite
of that system."
In fine, sir, I think it is clear that if we now em
brace the system of prohibitions and restrictions we
shall show an affection for what others have discarded,
and be attempting to ornament ourselves with cast-off
apparel. We are urged to adopt the system [protective] upon
general principles; and what would be the consequence
of the universal application of such a principle, but
that nations would abstain entirely from all inter
course with one another? I do not admit the general
principle; on the contrary, I think freedom of trade
to be the general principle, and restriction the excep
tion. We are asked what nations ever attained eminent
prosperity without encouraging manufactures? I may
ask, what nation ever reached the like prosperity with
out promoting foreign trade?
On the general question, sir, allow me to ask if the
doctrine of prohibition, as a general doctrine, be not
preposterous? Suppose all nations to act upon it; they
would be prosperous, then, according to the argument,
precisely in the proportion in which they abolished
trade with one another. The less of mutual commerce
the better, upon this hypothesis.

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 231
The poverty and unhappiness of Spain have been
attributed to the want of protection to her own in
dustry. If by this it is meant that the poverty of
Spain is owing to bad government and bad laws, the
remark is, in a great measure, just. But these very
laws are bad because they are restrictive, partial, and
prohibitory. If prohibition were protection, Spain
would seem to have had enough of it. .—State
Papers and Speeches on the Tariff, pp. 320-364.
"The Free Trade Memorial," prepared by Al
bert Gallatin in 1831, is one of the most famous
of American state papers on that side of the
question. It is difficult to find any quotable
passages in this paper which will show ade
quately the line of argument followed. In one
place he says:
We may, also, before we dismiss this branch of the
subject, and in order to rebut those general assertions
of the ruin that attends all nations which rely, in any
considerable degree, on foreign trade for a market,
appeal to that which we know best, which we have
seen and enjoyed — to the experience of North America.
Assisted only by the ordinary mechanical arts, and
with hardly any lAanufacturing establishments,
America, during two centuries, relied almost explu-
sively on the cultivation of her soil, and on the ex
portation of her products to foreign ports; and her
progress during that period, in population, wealth, and
in all the arts of civilization stands unparal
leled in the annals of mankind. A change of circum
stances may induce a partial and gradual alteration
in the pursuits of her citizens, and we may rest as
sured that, if not diverted by legislative interference,
they will, as heretofore, embrace those best adapted to
their situation. — State Papers and Speeches on the Tariff,
p. 156.
The only effect that can possibly be ascribed to a
protecting duty is that of encouraging the establish
ment of manufactures which would otherwise not
have existed, or ot inducing a greater number of per
sons to embark in those already existing. The pro
priety of the duty depends altogether on the proba-

232 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
bility of speedy success, that is to say, of the
manufacture being so far adapted to the circumstances
of the country that, after having been assisted by the
duty in surmounting the first difficulties to every new
undertaking, it will be able to sustain itself, and with
out such assistance to compete with the foreign article.
It has been clearly shown that the manufacture is
otherwise a losing concern, productive of national loss.
—Ibid, pp. 161, 162.
In 1845 Robert J. Walker, secretary of the
treasury, in his report to congress, urged that
the tariff be reduced to a revenue basis. The
following extracts indicate the nature of his
report :
In suggesting improvements in the revenue laWs, the
following principles have been adopted: —
1st. That no more money should be collected than is
necessary for the wants of the government, economic
ally administered.
2d. That no duty be imposed on any article above the
lowest rate which will yield the largest amount of
revenue. 4th. That the maximum revenue duty should be im
posed on luxuries.
5th. That all minimums, and all specific duties,
should be abolished, and ad valorem duties substituted
in their place
6th. That the duty should be so imposed as to ope
rate as equally as possible throughout the Union, dis
criminating neither for nor against any class or sec
tion. A protective tariff is a question regarding the en
hancement of the profits of capital. That is the ob
ject, and not to augment the wages of labor, which
would reduce those profits.
The present tariff is unjust and unequal.
It discriminates in favor of manufactures and against
agriculture, by imposing many higher duties upon the
manufactured fabric than upon the agricultural pro
duct out of which it is made. It discriminates in

A STUDY IX ECOXOMIC HISTORY. 233
favor of the manufacturer and against the mechanic,
[also] against the Uierchant, and
against the ship-builder and navigating interest,
etc. It discriminates in favor of the rich and against
the poor.
Legislation for classes is against the doctrine of
equal rights, repugnant to the spirit of our free insti
tutions. No prejudice is felt by the Secretary of the Treasury
against manufacturers. His opposition is to the pro
tective system, and not to classes or individuals.
Whilst a due regard to the just and equal rights of all
classes forbids a discrimination in favor of the manu
factures by duties above the lowest revenue limits,
no disposition is felt to discriminate against them.
. — State Papers and Speeches on the Tariff, pp.
219-232. II. Internal Improvements.
As early as 1774, at least, Washington saw
the great importance of uniting the waters of
the Ohio and Potomac, regarding it as "a great
and truly wise policy." (Works, IX, 31.) His
tour to the western country in 1784 confirmed
him in tbe idea. He wrote, October 10, 1784:
The shortest, easiest, and least expensive communi
cation with the invaluable and extensive country back
of us is by one or both of the rivers of this State
[Virginia] which have their sources in the Appalachian
mountains. . I need not remark to you, sir,
that the flanks and rear of the United States are pos
sessed by other powers, and formidable ones, too; nor
how necessary it is to apply the cement of interest to
bind all parts of the Union together by indissoluble
bonds, especially that part of it which lies immediately
west of us, with the Middle States. The West
ern States (I speak now from my own observation)
¦¦ stand as it were upon a pivot. The touch of a feather
would turn them any way. They have looked down
the Mississippi until the Spaniards, very impolitically
I think for themselves, threw difficulties in their way.

234 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
and they looked that way for no other reason than be
cause they could glide gently down the stream and
because they have no other means of coming to us
but by long land transportations and unimproved roads.
But smooth the road and make easy the way
for them, and then see what an influx of articles will
be poured upon us; how amazingly our exports will be
increased by them, and how amply we shall be com
pensated.— Wor/M {Sparks} IX, 59-63.
He urges in various letters the political and
commercial possibilities with which such con
nections are pregnant, and that they are neces
sary to save the West.
Jefferson wrote to a citizen of Kentucky, May
26, 1788:
I wish to see that country in the hands of people
well disposed, who know the value of the connection
between that and the maratime states and who wish to
cultivate it. I consider their happiness as bound up
together and that every measure should be taken which
may draw the bands of union tighter. — Jefferson's
Works, V (Ford).
And to Washington he wrote, May 10, 1789:
I consider the union of [the Potomac and Ohio riv
ers] the strongest link of connection between the
eastern and western sides of our confederacy. — Ibid, V,
pp. 03-94.
To Madison he wrote, March 6, 1796:
Have you considered all the consequences of your
proposition [in Congress for buildihg a road from
Maine to Georgia] respecting port roads? I view it as
a source of boundless patronage by the executive, job
bing to members of Congress and their friends, and a
bottomless abyss of public money. You will begin by
only appropriating the surplus of the post office reve
nues; but the other revenues will soon be called to
their aid, and it will be a scene of eternal scramble
among the members who can get most money wasted
in their state, and they will always get most who ar«
meanest— /6id, VII, pp. 63-64.

A STUDY IN ECOXOMIC HISTORY. 235
Jefferson wrote to Baron Humboldt:
In our America we are turning to public improve
ments. Schools, roads, and canals are everywhere
either in operation or contemplation. The most gi
gantic undertaking is that of New York for [the Erie
Canal]. Internal naivigation by steamboats is
rapidly spreading. We consider the employ
ment of the contributions which our citizens can
spare, after feeding, and clothing, and lodging them
selves comfortably, as more useful, more moral, and
even more splendid than that preferred by Europe of
destroying human life, labor, and happiness.— Works
(1854 Ed.), VII, p. 75.
To Gallatin he wrote, June 16, 1817, regard
ing Madison's recent veto. He thinks the veto
fortunate: Every state will certainly concede the power and this
will be a national confirmation of the ground of ap
peal to them and will settle forever the meaning of this
phrase [the "general welfare" clause of article I, sec
tion 8] which, by a mere grammatical quibble, has
countenanced the General Government in a claim of
universal power. It is fortunate for another
reason, as the States, in conceding the power, will
modify it either by requiring the federal ratio of ex
pense in each state, or otherwise, so as to secure us
against its partial exercise. — Ibid, VII, p. 79.
To James Madison, December 24, 182.5, he
said: I have for some time considered the question of in
ternal improvement as desperate. The torrent of gen
eral 'opinion sets so strongly in favor of it as to be
irresistible. And I suppose that even the opposition
In Congress will hereafter be feeble and formal.
I learn from Richmond that those who think with us
there are in a state of perfect dismay, not knowing
what to do or what to propose. — Ibid, VII, p. 4^2.
Hamilton, in 1792, shows how he feels on the
question in the following words:
The symptoms of attention to the improvement of
inland navigation which have lately appeared in some
quarters must fill with pleasure every heart warmed

236 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
with a true zeal for the prosperity of the country.
These examples it is to be hoped will stimulate the
exertions of the Government and citizens of every
state. There can certainly be no object more worthy
of the care of the local administration; and it were to
be wished that there was no doubt of the power of the
National Government to lend its direct aid on a com
prehensive plan. This is one of those improvements
which could be prosecuted with more efficacy by the
whole than by any part or parts of the Union. There
are cases in which the general interest will, be in dan
ger to be sacrificed to the collision of some supposed
local interests. Jealousies in matters of this kind are
as apt to exist as they aie apt to be erroneous. — Hamil
ton's Report on Mamtfacturcs, Works (1851 Ed.), Ill, pp.
255-57. He held to the same views in 1801, as may be
seen from this extract:
The improvement of the communications between the
different parts of the country is an object well worthy
of the national purse and one which would abundantly
repay to labor the portion of its earnings which may
have been borrowed for that purpose. To provide
roads and bridges is within the direct purview of the
Constitution. In many parts of the country, especially
in the Western Territory, a matter in which the At
lantic States are equally interested, aqueducts and ca
nals would also be fit subjects of pecuniary aid from
the Government. — Hamilton's Works, VII, pp. 755-56.
The improvement of the roads would be a measure
universally popular. None can be more so. For this
purpose a regular plan should be adopted co-exten
sive with the Union, to be successively executed, and
a fund should be appropriated sufficient for the basis
of a loan of a million of dollars. The revenue of
the post office naturally offers itself. The future reve
nue from tolls would more than reimburse the ex
pense, and public utility would be promoted in every
direction. An article ought to be proposed to
be added to the Constitution for empowering Congress
to open canals in all cases in which it may be nec
essary to conduct them through the territory of two'
or more States or through the territory of a State

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 237
and that of the United States The power is very de
sirable for the purpose of improving the prodigious
facilities for inland navigation with which nature has
favored this country. It will also assist commerce and
agriculture by rendering the transportation of com
modities more cheap and expeditious. 'It will tend to
secure the connection, by facilitating the communica
tion betweeii distant portions of the Union, and it will
be a useful source of influence to the government. —
Hamilton's Works, VI, pp. 385-87.
A committee in the House of Representatives
reported, March 5, 1806, upon the Chesapeake
and Delaware canal, that they "cannot hesitate
a moment in deciding on the importance and
extensive utility" of the canal.
They consider the project as an opening wedge for
an extensive inland navigation v'liich would at all
times be of an immense advantage to the commercial
as well as the agricultural and manufacturing parts
of the community. But in the event of a war its
advantages would be incalculable. Did the
finances of the country admit of it the committee
would feel a perfect freedom in recommending
the propriety of such aid. — American
State Papers, I, Miscellaneous, p. 452.
[The senate committee reported similarly the -same
year that] it is among tke first duties of a Govern
ment to promote public improvements of a general
nature. — Ibid, p. 454-
In Gallatin's famous report On roads and
canals, made in 1807, we find the most complete
discussion of the subject made in the early
years of our history. In part he says:
The general utility of artificial roads and canals is
at this time so universally admitted as hardly to re
quire any additional proofs. It is sufficiently evident
that whenever the annual expense of transportation
on a certain route, in its natural state, exceeds the
interest on the capital employed in improving the com
munication, and the annual expense of transportation
(exclusively of tho tolls) by the improved route, the
difference is an annual additional income to the na-

238 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
tion.; Some works already executed are un
profitable; many more remain unattempted, because
their ultimate productiveness depends on other im
provements too extensive or too distant to be em
braced by the same individuals. The General Gov
ernment can -alone remove these obstacles. With
resources amply sufficient for the completion of every
practicable improvement it will always supply the
capital wanted for any work which it may undertake
as fast as the work itself can progress; avoiding
thereby the ruinous loss of interest on a dormant
capital, and reducing the real expense to its lowest
rate. The inconveniences, complaints, and
perhaps dangers, which may result from a vast extent
of territory, can no otherwise be radically removed
or prevented than by opening speedy and easy com
munications through all its parts. Good roads and
canals will shorten distances, facilitate commercial and
personal intercourse, and unite by a still more in
timate community of interests the most remote quarters
of the United States. No other single operation within
the power of Government can more effectually tend to
strengthen and perpetuate that Union which secures
external independence, domestic peace, and internal
liberty. [The improvements he therefore sug
gests as] most important to facilitate the communica
tion, between the great geographical 'divisions of the
United States [are: I, from north to south parallel
to the seacoast, canals costing $3,000,000, turnpikes
costing $4,800,000; II, from east to west forming com
munications across the mountains between the At
lantic and western rivers, improvement in Atlantic
rivers costing $1,500,000, turnpikes and road improve
ments costing $3,000,000, canals costing $300,000; III,
improvements forming inland navigations between the
Atlantic seacoast and the St. Lawrence and Great
Lakes, $4,000,000. This total of $16,600,000 is also in
creased by $3,400,000 for local improvements — a grand
total of $20,000,000, which it is proposed to accomplish
in ten yearly payments of $2,000,000 each. The public
lands may be sold for the purpose and the improve
ments will, in turn, benefit the purchasers.]
It is evident that the United States cannot, under
the Constitution, open any road or canal, without the

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 239
consent of the State through which such road or canal
must pass. In order therefore to remove every im
pediment to a national plan of internal improvement,
an amendment to the Constitution was suggested by
the Executive when the subject was recommended to
the consideration of Congress [by President Jefferson
in Message 11]. Until this be obtained, the assent of
the States being necessary for each improvement, the
modifications under which that assent may be given,
will necessarily control the manner of applying the
money. The United States may with the atsent
of the States undertake some of the works at their
sole expense or they may subscribe a certain number
of shares of the stock of companies incorporated for
the purpose. Loans might also, in some instances,
be made to such companies. The first mode would
perhaps, by effectually controlling local interests, give
the most proper general direction to the work. Its
details would probably be executed on a more eco
nomical plan by private companies. — American State
Papers, I, Miscellaneous, pp. 724-25, 740-41-
Benton (Mo.), May 1, 1828, says:
He was in favor of the federal power to make
roads and canals of national importance. He
was in favor of the construction of such roads and
canals by the Federal Government provided the States
through which they would pass consented to it .;
not that the consent of a State could confer
a power upon Congress not derived from the Consti
tution; but it was decent and becoming to consult the
wishes of the State in all such cases because its assent
would do away with all that class of objections to the
exercise of the power which were founded upon a real
or supposed violation of State sovereignty and a real
or supposed violation of State territory. — Register De
bates, IV, p. 718.
Calhoun (S. C.) speaks as follows in 1817:
[In times of peace and plenty] to what can we di
rect our resources and attention more important than
internal improvements? What can. add more to the
wealth, the strength, and the political prosperity of
our country? It tends to diffuse universal op-

240 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
ulence. . When we come to consider how inti
mately the strength and political prosperity of the
Republic are connected with this subject we find the
most urgent reasons why we should apply our re
sources to them. Unless the means of com
mercial intercourse are rendered much more perfect
than they now are we shall never be able in war to
raise the necessary supplies and the means
by which that [remedy] is to be effected are roads,
canals, and the coasting trade. But on this
subject of national power what can be more important
than a perfect unity in every part, in feelings and
sentiments? And what can tend more powerfully to
produce it than overcoming the effects of distance?
We are great, g,nd rapidly — he was about to
say fearfully — growing. This, said he, is our pride
and danger — our weakness and our strength.
Let us then bind the Republic together with
a perfect system of roads and canals. Let us conquer
space. — Annals of Congress, XXX, pp. 851-856.
At about the same time, February S, 1817, the
House used this language:
Upon mature consideration the facility of commer
cial and personal intercourse throughout the whole
extent of the United States and its Territories is
viewed by the committee, as it appears to have been
viewed by former committees of both branches of the
National Legislature, and by every Executive of the
Government since its formation, as an essential in
gredient in the general economy of the nation as well
in relation to the pursuits of peace as to those of war
and also to the perpetuation and integrity of the Re
publican Union. — American State Papers, II, Miscella
neous, p. -'/.20.
Madison vetoes a bill passed by Congress in
1817 to appropriate money for internal improve
ments, and justifies his veto, in part, in these
words :
The legislative powers vested in Congress are speci
fied and enumerated in the eighth section of the first
article of the Constitution and it does not appear
that power proposed by the bill ["An act to set apart

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 241
and pledge certain funds for internal improvements"]
is among the enumerated powers or that It falls by
any just interpretation within the power to make laws
necessary and proper for carrying into execution those
or other powers held by the Constitution in the Gov
ernment of the United States. If a general
power to construct roads and canals and to improve
the navigation of water courses, with the train of
powers incident thereto, be not possessed by Congress,
the assent of the States . cannot confer the
power. [But while vetoing the bill he "cherishes the
hope" that its beneficial objects may be attained by
an amendment to the Constitution.] — Messages and
Papers of the Presidents, I, pp. 584-585.
Monroe, in his "Views," May 4, 1822, sum
marized the arguments that have been ad
vanced in favor of the constitutional power of
Congress to act. He says:
The advocates of the power derive it from the fol
lowing sources: First, the right to establish post-
offices and post-roads; second, to declare war; third,
to regulate commerce among the several States; fourth,
from the power to pay the debts and provide for the
common defence and general welfare of the United
¦States; fifth, from the power to make all laws neces
sary and proper for carrying into execution all the
powers vested by the Constitution in the Government
of the United States or in any department or officer
thereof; sixth and lastly, froni the power to dispose of
and make all needful rules and regulations respecting
the territory and other property of the United States.
[He denies all successively, his position as to each
may be summarized as follows:
[No. 1. merely gives to Congress power to fix the sites
of post-offices and the routes on which the mail may
be carried.
No. 2, if allowed, would cover the entire country
with roads which might be useful in time of war but
most of which cannot possibly ever be connected with
war transportation. And the influences from clause
17 of the Constitution and general reasoning are all
against- it. i i .

242 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
No. 3. Such commercial powers were transferred to
the United States whose exercise by the States had
proved mischievous and irritating; internal improve
ments had nothing to do with these, but only the levy
ing of duties and imposts.
No. 4 merely gives to Congress authority to appro
priate the public moneys laid and collected by taxes,
duties, imposts, and excises. It is the only clause
in the Constitution directly giving the right of appro
priation; it is evidently not given in class 1 as a dis
tinct grant; if it were, then its vast extent swallows
up all the rest of the Constitution and makes it use
less. But this power of appropriation is not limited
to expenditures under the other specific grants of the
eighth section strictly constructed, but is broad, gen
eral, discretionary, yet always limited like the Gov
ernment of the Union to "great national purposes."
For internal Improvements money might be appro
priated, but this of itself can do nothing toward secur
ing the land, jurisdiction, building and protecting the
works. No. 5 is of no value unless the power is primarily
granted by one of .the other powers.
No. 6 is shown by an historical argument to have
nothing to do with the question.] — Richardson's Mes
sages and Papers of the Presidents, II, pp. 156-175.
Trimble (Ky.), January 21, 1825, says:
Public opinion was embodying- itself in favor of
roads and canals, and during the last year had made
so many demonstrations in favor of internal improve
ments that Congress might consider itself called upon
by the nation to begin the work in good earnest. —
Register of Debates, I, p. 319.
Buchanan (Pa.), 18i}6, uses this language:
If there be any principle of constitutional law
which, at this day, should be considered as settled, it
is that Congress has the power to aid internal im
provement by subscribing for stock in companies in
corporated by the States.^ — Register of Debates, II, p.
1615. Clay (Ky.), in 1825,
considered the question as to the existence and the

a STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 243
exercise of a power in the General Government to
carry Into effect a system of internal improvements,
as amounting to the question whether the union of
.these States should be preserved or not. As
to the opinion that the carrying on of these improve
ments belonged to the States in their individual and
separate chairacter, it might as well be expected that
the States should perform any other duty which ap
pertained to the General Government. You have no
more right to ask the individual States to
make internal improvements for the general welfare
than you have to ask them to make war for the gen
eral welfare or to build fortifications for the general
defence. — Register of Debates, I, p. 231.
In Jackson's veto of the Maysville road ap
propriation, 1830, we read:
[The first possible line of objection would be upon
the question of the sovereignty of the States within
whose limits improvements are contemplated if juris
diction of the territory be claimed by the General
Government as necessary to the preservation and use
of the improvements; the second would be upon the
mere question of right to appropriate public moneys
for such objects. So far the Government has never
executed the first power — which it does not, in reality,
possess. Long practice has sanctioned the second;
but always] professedly under the control of the gen
eral principle that the works which might be thus
aided should be "of a general, not local, national, not
State," character. A disregard of this distinction
would of necessity lead to the subversion of the fed
eral system. That even this is an unsafe one, arbi
trary in its nature, and liable, consequently, to great
abuses, is too obvious to require the confirmation of
experience. Assuming the right to appropriate money
to aid in the construction of national works to be
warranted by the contemporaneous and continued ex
position of the Constitution, its insufficiency for the
successful prosecution of them must be admitted by
all candid minds. [Whether to enable the Federal
Government itself to construct the improvements, or
to define the occasion, manner, and extent of its ap
propriations to works prosecuted by the States, it is

244 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
true] that a constitutional adjustment of this power
upon equitable principles is in the highest degree de
sirable, nor can it fail to be promoted by
every sincere friend to the success of our political in
stitutions. — Messages and Papers of the Presidents, II,
pp. 483-93.
Jackson's message of December 1, 1834, said :
When the bill authorizing a subscription in
the Maysville & Lexington Turnpike Co. passed the
two houses, there had been reported by the Committee
on Internal Improvements bills containing appropri
ations for such objects, exclusive of those for the
Cumberland road and for harbors and light-houses, to
the amount of about 106,000,000 of dollars. In this
amount was included authority to subscribe
for the stock of different companies to a great extent,
and the residue was principally for the direct con
struction of roads by this Government. In addition to
these projects which had been presented . . there
were still pending before the committees and in
memorials presented, but not refused, different projects
the expenses of which must have ex
ceeded 100,000,000 of dollars. ,
Since the Maysville veto "no attempt has
been made, to induce' Congress to exercise this power.
The applications for the construction of roads and
canals are no longer presented; and we have
good reason to infer that the consent of public senti
ment has become so decided against the pretension as
effectually to discourage its reassertion." — Messages
and Papers of the Presidents, III, pp. 120-21.
Polk, in his veto, 1847, uses these words:
It is not easy to perceive the difference in principle
or mischievous tendency between appropriations for
making roads and digging canals and appropriations
to deepen rivers and improve harbors. All are alike
within the limits and jurisdiction of the States.
If the power to improve a harbor be admitted it ia
not easy to perceive how the power to deepen every
inlet on the ocean or the lakes and make harbors
where there are none can be denied. If the power to
clear out or deepen the channel of rivers near their
mouths be admitted, it is not easy to perceive how the

A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 245
power to improve them to their fountain head and
make them navigable to their sources can be denied.
May the General Government exercise power
and jurisdiction over the soil of a State consisting of
rocks and sandbars in the beds of its rivers? and may
it not execute a canal around its waterfalls or across
its lands for precisely the same object? — Ibid, IV, pp.
6I2-6I4. Buchanan, in his veto of 1860, adds:
The distinctive spirit and character which pervades
the Constitution is that the powers of the General
Government are confined to subjects of com
mon interest to all the States, carefully leaving the
internal and domestic concerns of each individual
State to be controJled by its own people and legisla
ture. Besides, the corrupting and seducing
money infiuence exerte* by the General Government
in carrying into effect a system of internal improve
ments might be perverted to increase and consolidate
its own power to the detriment of the rights of the
States. Equality among the States is equity.
This quality is the very essence of the Constitution.
No preference can justly be given to one of the sov
ereign States over another. The truth is most
of these improvements are in a great degree local in
their character and for the particular benefit of cor
porations or individuals in their vicinity, though they
may have an odor of nationality on the principle that
whatever benefits any part indirectly benefits the
whole. Article I, section 10, paragraph 3, affords a
perfectly legitimate mode of acquiring the improve
ments, in -a constitutional manner, by the States. —
Ibid, V, pp. 803-5. QUESTIONS.
1. How would the Americans feel towards the law
of 1699? 2. Why was bar iron to be imported from
America? 3. How would it be helpful to the colo
nists? 4. Why were the colonists not to manufacture
the bar iron into steel? 5. What was to be done with
the American mills? 6. How would such laws as these
make the colonists feel in regard to the restrictive
system? ^ ,,
1 What argument does Franklin use to secure the
retention of Canada? 2. What industry does Franklin
evidently prefer? 3. What condition results where

246 AMERICAN HISTORY STUDIES.
manufactures prevail? 4. How does Franklin feel
toward the restrictive system? 5. Compare the ideas
of Franklin and Jefferson. 6. Why could manufactures
succeed in America? 7. Did the statesmen, judged by
the ones cited, believe in restraints and discrimina
tions? 8. How would you account for their views?
9. How did they feel after about 1786? 10. Explain the
reasons for the change. 11. Did the statesmen like
the change, or were they forced to make it?
1. Did Hamilton believe in protection as a general
principle? 2. What arguments did he give for protec
tion? 3. What plans did Hamilton propose to en
courage manuf aatures ? 4. What position would he
probably take now were he living? 5. Outline the
plan of Mr. Dallas. 6. To what class of products did
he propose to give aid? 7. Why not aid class three?
1. What principle did Webster advocate in 1824?
2. What principle did Clay? 3. What condition was
the country in according to Clay; to Webster? 4. What
remedy did Clay propose for the distress? 5. How
would Clay now have to argue in regard to England?
6. Why had England been prosperous, according to
Clay; to Webster? 7. What interest was Clay espe
cially speaking for? What Webster? 8. How do you
explain the fact that the two men differed so radically
both in regard to fact and theory? 9. What new idea
does Gallatin bring in? 10. What does he claim pro
tection must accomplish to be beneficial? 11. Name
the arguments Dallas makes. 12. Who made, in your
opinion, the ablest argument? Why?
1. What good did Washington expect from internal
improvements? 2. How did Jefferson expect to join
the west to the east? 3. Did he believe in the general
government undertaking a system of internal improve
ments? 4. Compare Jefferson's and Hamilton's views.
5. On which side was Gallatin? 6. Was Calhoun, in
1817, a nationalist or a States Rights man, judging
from the extract given? 7. Make a list of all the ar
guments you find for internal improvements; another
list of those against. 8. Into how many classes did
Jackson divide internal improvements? 9. In what
ways was it claimed the nation might aid internal im
provements? 10. Can you give the reasons for so many
vetoes of bills for internal improvements? 11. Write a
paper on the benefits of a system of internal improve
ments. 12. Write one on the dangers in it.

-sr^:

SS*» ^'JiSL'*'

¦•r