The Life of John Marshall, Volume 1: Frontiersman, soldier, lawmaker, 1755-1788

967

Minton Collins at Richmond to Stephen Collins at Philadelphia, May 8, 1788; MS., Lib. Cong.

968

Sam Smith in London to Stephen Collins in Philadelphia, July 21, 1788; ib.

969

Minton Collins to Stephen Collins, Aug. 9, 1788; ib.

970

"Vergennes complained, and with a good deal of stress, that they did not find a sufficient dependence on arrangements taken with us. This was the third time, too, he had done it… He observed too, that the administration of justice with us was tardy, insomuch that their merchants, when they had money due to them within our States, considered it as desperate; and that our commercial regulations, in general, were disgusting to them." (Jefferson's Report; Works: Ford, iv, 487.)

971

Jefferson to Stuart, Jan. 25, 1786; ib., v, 74.

972

Jefferson to Madison, Dec. 16, 1786; ib., v, 230.

973

Jefferson to Carrington, Paris, Aug. 4, 1787; ib., 318; also 332; and Jefferson to Wythe, Sept. 16, 1787; ib., 340.

974

Jefferson to Carrington, Paris, Aug. 4, 1787; ib., 318.

975

Jefferson to Meusnier, Jan. 24, 1786; ib., 8.

976

Jefferson to Meusnier, Jan. 24, 1786; Works: Ford, v, 8.

977

Jefferson to Madison, Dec. 20, 1787; ib., 373-74. Jefferson concluded, prophetically, that when the people "get piled upon one another, in large cities, as in Europe, they will become as corrupt as Europe." (Ib.)

978

Jefferson to Hogendorp, Oct. 13, 1785; ib., iv, 469.

979

Jefferson to Stuart, Jan. 25, 1786; ib., v, 74.

980

See infra, chap. IX.

981

For a careful study of this important but neglected subject see Professor Edward Payson Smith's paper in Jameson, 46-115.

982

Grigsby, i, 25.

983

Travelers from the District of Kentucky or from the back settlements of Virginia always journeyed fully armed, in readiness to defend themselves from attack by Indians or others in their journey through the wilderness.

984

Grigsby, i, 27-28.

985

Ib., 25.

986

The Jockey Club was holding its annual races at Richmond when the Constitutional Convention of 1788 convened. (Christian, 31.)

987

Grigsby, i. 31.

988

Humphrey Marshall, from the District of Kentucky, saw for the first time one number of the Federalist, only after he had reached the more thickly peopled districts of Virginia while on his way to the Convention. (ib., footnote to 31.)

989

George Nicholas to Madison, April 5, 1788; Writings: Hunt, v, footnote to p. 115.

990

"The most common and ostensible objection was that it [the Constitution] would endanger state rights and personal liberty – that it was too strong." (Humphrey Marshall, i, 285.)

991

Tyler, i, 142. Grigsby estimates that three fourths of the people of Virginia were opposed to the Constitution. (Grigsby, i, footnote to 160.)

992

Lee to Madison, Dec. 1787; Writings: Hunt, v, footnote to p. 88.

993

Madison's father to Madison, Jan. 30, 1788; Writings: Hunt, v, footnote to p. 105.

994

Madison to Jefferson, Feb. 19, 1788; ib., 103.

995

Henry to Lamb, June 9, 1788; Henry, ii, 342.

996

Minton Collins to Stephen Collins, March 16, 1788; Collins MSS., Lib. Cong.

997

Even Hamilton admitted this. "The framers of it [the Constitution] will have to encounter the disrepute of having brought about a revolution in government, without substituting anything that was worthy of the effort; they pulled down one Utopia, it will be said, to build up another." (Hamilton to Washington, Sept., 1788; Hamilton's Works: Lodge, ix, 444; and also in Jefferson, Writings: Ford, xi, footnote to 330.) Martin Van Buren describes the action of the Federal Convention that framed the Constitution, in "having … set aside the instructions of Congress by making a new Constitution … an heroic but lawless act." (Van Buren, 49-50.)

Professor Burgess does not overstate the case when he declares: "Had Julius or Napoleon committed these acts [of the Federal Convention in framing and submitting the Constitution], they would have been pronounced coups d'état." (Burgess, i, 105.)

Also see Beard: Econ. I. C., 217-18.

998

Ford: P. on C., 14.

999

Ib., 100-01.

1000

Ford: P. on C., 284-85. And see Jameson, 40-49.

1001

Washington to Lafayette, Sept. 18, 1788; Writings: Sparks, ix, 265.

1002

Connecticut, New Jersey, and Delaware had practically no ports and, under the Confederation, were at the mercy of Massachusetts, New York, and Pennsylvania in all matters of trade. The Constitution, of course, remedied this serious defect. Also, these smaller States had forced the compromise by which they, with their comparatively small populations, were to have an equal voice in the Senate with New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, with their comparatively great populations. And therefore they would have practically equal weight in the law – and treaty-making power of the Government. This was the most formidable of the many rocks on which the Federal Convention all but broke up.

1003

One proposition was to call the State Convention "within ten days." (See "Address of the Minority of the Pennsylvania Convention," in McMaster and Stone, 458.)

1004

Ib., 3-4; and see ib., 75. An excuse for these mob methods was that the Legislature previously had resolved to adjourn sine die on that very day. This would put off action until the next session. The Anti-Constitutionalists urged – with entire truthfulness – that even this delay would give the people too little time to inform themselves upon the "New Plan" of government, as it was called, which the Convention was to pass upon in the people's name. "Not one in twenty know anything about it." (Mr. Whitehall in debate in the Legislature; ib., 32.)

1005

McMaster and Stone, 459-60. This charge was wholly accurate. Both sides exerted themselves to carry the "election." The Anti-Constitutionalists declared that they stood for "the principles of the Revolution"; yet, asserts Graydon, who was at Reading at the time, they sought the support of the Tories; the country lawyers were opposed to the "New Plan" and agreed not "to practice or accept any office under the Constitution"; but the Constitutionalists promised "prothonotaryships, attorney generalships, chief justiceships, and what not," and the hostile attorneys "were tempted and did eat." Describing the spirit of the times, Graydon testifies that "pelf was a better goal than liberty and at no period in my recollection was the worship of Mammon more widely spread, more sordid and disgusting."

Everybody who wanted it had a military title, that of major being "the very lowest that a dasher of any figure would accept." To "clap on a uniform and a pair of epaulettes, and scamper about with some militia general for a day or two" was enough to acquire the coveted rank. Thus, those who had never been in the army, but "had played a safe and calculating game" at home and "attended to their interests," were not only "the men of mark and consideration," but majors, colonels, and generals as well. (Graydon, 331-33.)

Noting, at a later time, this passion for military titles Weld says: "In every part of America a European is surprised at finding so many men with military titles … but no where … is there such a superfluity of these military personages as in the little town of Staunton; there is hardly a decent person in it … but what is a colonel, a major, or a captain." (Weld, i, 236-37.)

Such were the conditions in the larger towns when the members of the Pennsylvania Convention were chosen. The small vote cast seems to justify the charge that the country districts and inaccessible parts of the State did not even know of the election.

1006

McMaster and Stone, 503-04.

1007

McMaster and Stone, 173-74.

1008

Independent Gazetteer: ib., 183-84.

1009

Ib., 184-85.

1010

Pennsylvania Debates, in McMaster and Stone, 231. Elliott prints only a small part of these debates.

1011

Ib., 283-85.

1012

Ib., 219.

1013

McMaster and Stone, 253.

1014

Findley covered them with confusion in this statement by citing authority. Wilson irritably quoted in retort the words of Maynard to a student: "Young Man! I have forgotten more law than ever you learned." (Ib., 352-64.)

1015

Ib., 361-63.

1016

Ib., 365.

1017

Ib.

1018

Ib., 419.

1019

McMaster and Stone, 365.

1020

Ib., 453. The conduct of the Pennsylvania supporters of the Constitution aroused indignation in other States, and caused some who had favored the new plan of government to change their views. "On reception of the Report of the [Federal] Convention, I perused, and admir'd it; – Or rather, like many who still think they admire it, I loved Geo. Washington – I venerated Benj. Franklin – and therefore concluded that I must love and venerate all the works of their hands; – … The honest and uninformed freemen of America entertain the same opinion of those two gentlemen as do European slaves of their Princes, – 'that they can do no wrong.'"

But, continues Wait, "on the unprecedented Conduct of the Pennsylvania Legislature [and Convention] I found myself Disposed to lend an ear to the arguments of the opposition – not with an expectation of being convinced that the new Constitution was defective; but because I thought the minority had been ill used; and I felt a little curious to hear the particulars," with the result that "I am dissatisfied with the proposed Constitution." (Wait to Thatcher, Jan. 8, 1788; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 262; and see infra.)

Others did not, even then, entertain Mr. Wait's reverence for Washington, when it came to accepting the Constitution because of his support. When Hamilton asked General Lamb how he could oppose the Constitution when it was certain that his "good friend Genl. Washington would … be the first President under it," Lamb "reply'd that … after him Genl. Slushington might be the next or second president." (Ledlie to Lamb; MS., N.Y. Hist. Soc.)

1021

McMaster and Stone, 432-35.

1022

Ib., 424.

1023

Ib., 14-15.

1024

Ib.

1025

"Address of the Minority"; McMaster and Stone, 454-83.

1026

"Address of the Minority"; McMaster and Stone, 466.

1027

Ib., 469-70.

1028

Ib., 480.

1029

See various contemporary accounts of this riot reprinted in McMaster and Stone, 486-94.

1030

The authorship of the "Letters of Centinel" remains unsettled. It seems probable that they were the work of Eleazer Oswald, printer of the Independent Gazetteer, and one George Bryan, both of Philadelphia. (See ib., 6-7, and footnote.)

1031

"Letters of Centinel," no. 4, ib., 606.

1032

Ib., 620.

1033

Ib., 625.

1034

McMaster and Stone, 624.

1035

Ib., 630, 637, 639, 642, 653, 655.

1036

Ib., 629.

1037

Ib., 641.

1038

Ib., 631; and see infra, chap. XI.

1039

Ib., 639.

1040

Ib., 658.

1041

Ib., 661.

1042

Ib., 667.

1043

McMaster and Stone, 667.

1044

Ib., 668.

1045

"A Real Patriot," in Independent Gazetteer, reprinted in McMaster and Stone, 524.

1046

"Gomes," in ib., 527.

1047

H. Chapman to Stephen Collins, June 20, 1788; MS., Lib. Cong. Oswald, like Thomas Paine, was an Englishman.

1048

Madison to Jefferson, Feb. 19, 1788; Writings: Hunt, v, 102.

1049

Madison to Jefferson, Feb. 19, 1788; Writings: Hunt, v, 101.

1050

Gore to Thatcher, June 9, 1788; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 263. This was a very shrewd move; for Hancock had not yet been won over to the Constitution; he was popular with the protesting delegates, and perhaps could not have been defeated had they made him their candidate for presiding officer; the preferment flattered Hancock's abnormal vanity and insured the Constitutionalists against his active opposition; and, most of all, this mark of their favor prepared the way for the decisive use the Constitutionalist leaders finally were able to make of him. Madison describes Hancock as being "weak, ambitious, a courtier of popularity, given to low intrigue." (Madison to Jefferson, Oct. 17, 1788; Writings: Hunt, v, 270.)

1051

Madison to Jefferson, Feb. 19, 1788; Writings: Hunt, v, 101.

1052

Madison to Pendleton, Feb. 21, 1788; ib., 108.

1053

King to Madison, Jan. 27, 1788; King, i, 316.

1054

Ib., 317.

1055

Elliott, ii, 40.

1056

Harding, 48. These towns were bitterly opposed to the Constitution. Had they sent delegates, Massachusetts surely would have rejected the Constitution; for even by the aid of the deal hereafter described, there was a very small majority for the Constitution. And if Massachusetts had refused to ratify it, Virginia would, beyond the possibility of a doubt, have rejected it also. (See infra, chaps. X, XI, and XII.) And such action by Massachusetts and Virginia would, with absolute certainty, have doomed the fundamental law by which the Nation to-day exists. Thus it is that the refusal of forty-six Massachusetts towns to send representatives to the State Convention changed the destiny of the Republic.

1057

Hill to Thatcher, Dec. 12, 1787; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 259.

1058

Lee to Thatcher, Jan. 23, 1788; ib., 266-67.

1059

Ib., 267.

1060

Ib.

1061

Bangs to Thatcher, Jan. 1, 1788; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 260.

1062

Sewall to Thatcher, Jan. 5, 1788; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 260-61.

1063

Savage to Thatcher, Jan. 11, 1788; ib., 264.

1064

Barrell to Thatcher, Jan. 15, 1788; ib., 265.

1065

Wait to Thatcher, Jan. 8, 1788; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 261. Wait was an unusually intelligent and forceful editor of a New England newspaper, the Cumberland Gazette. (Ib., 258.)

1066

Gore to Thatcher, Dec. 30, 1787; ib., 260.

1067

Lincoln to Washington, Feb. 3, 1788; Cor. Rev.: Sparks, iv, 206.

1068

See infra.

1069

King to Madison, Jan. 27, 1788; King, i, 317.

1070

Elliott, ii, 105-06.

1071

Ib., 101.

1072

Elliott, ii, 102.

1073

Ib., 28.

1074

Ib., 96.

1075

Ib., 94.

1076

Ib., 80.

1077

Ib., 48.

1078

Elliot, ii, 133.

1079

Ib., 136-37.

1080

Ib., 16.

1081

Ib., 111.

1082

Ib., 148.

1083

Ib., 44.

1084

Elliott, ii, 102-04. Mr. Thatcher made the best summary of the unhappy state of the country under the Confederation. (Ib., 141-48.)

1085

King to Madison, Jan. 20, 1788; King, i, 314.

1086

Rives, ii, 524-25. "To manage the cause against them (the jealous opponents of the Constitution) are the present and late governor, three judges of the supreme court, fifteen members of the Senate, twenty-four among the most respectable of the clergy, ten or twelve of the first characters at the bar, judges of probate, high sheriffs of counties, and many other respectable people, merchants, &c., Generals Heath, Lincoln, Brooks, and others of the late army." (Nathaniel Gorham to Madison, quoted in ib.)

1087

"Hancock has committed himself in our favor… You will be astonished, when you see the list of names that such an union of men has taken place on this question. Hancock will, hereafter, receive the universal support of Bowdoin's friends; and we told him, that, if Virginia does not unite, which is problematical, he is considered as the only fair candidate for President." (King to Knox, Feb. 1, 1788; King, i, 319. The italics are those of King.)

1088

Ib., ii, 525.

1089

Elliott, ii, 178-81.

1090

Ib., 140.

1091

Elliott, ii, 153.

1092

Madison to Randolph, April 10, 1788; Writings: Hunt, v, 117.

1093

Elliott, ii, 159-61.

1094

Widgery to Thatcher, Feb. 8, 1788; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 270.

1095

Ib.

1096

Elliott, ii, 218.

1097

Widgery to Thatcher, Feb. 8, 1788; Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 270-71.

1098

King to Madison, Feb. 6, 1788; King, i, 320.

1099

Gerry, in Ford: P. on C., 1-23.

1100

Ib., 23. When a bundle of copies of Gerry's pamphlet was received by the New York Anti-Constitutionalists in Albany County, they decided that it was "in a style too sublime and florid for the common people in this part of the country." (Ib., 1.)

1101

During the debates the Boston Gazette published the following charge that bribery was being employed to get votes for the Constitution: —

BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION!!!

"The most diabolical plan is on foot to corrupt the members of the Convention, who oppose the adoption of the new Constitution. Large sums of money have been brought from a neighboring state for that purpose, contributed by the wealthy. If so, is it not probable there may be collections for the same accursed purpose nearer home? Centinel." (Elliott, ii, 51.)

The Convention appointed a committee to investigate (ib.); it found that the charge was based on extremely vague rumor. (Harding, 103.) There the matter appears to have been dropped.

More than eighty years afterward, Henry B. Dawson, the editor of the Historical Magazine, a scholar of standing, asserted, personally, in his publication: "It is very well known – indeed, the son and biographer of one of the great leaders of the Constitutionalists in New York has frankly admitted to us —that enough members of the Massachusetts Convention were bought with money from New York to secure the ratification of the new system by Massachusetts." (Hist. Mag. (2d Series), vi, 268, footnote, referring to Savage's letter to Thatcher telling of the charge in the Boston Gazette.)

Professor Harding discredits the whole story. (Harding, 101-05.) It is referred to only as showing the excited and suspicious temper of the times.

1102

Langdon to Washington, Feb. 28, 1788; Cor. Rev.: Sparks, iv, 212. "At least three fourths of the property, and a large proportion of the abilities in the State are friendly to the proposed system. The opposition here, as has generally been the case, was composed of men who were involved in debt." (Lear to Washington, June 22, 1788; ib., 224-25.)

1103

Lear to Washington, June 2, 1788; Cor. Rev.: Sparks, iv, 220.

1104

Langdon to King, Feb. 23, 1788; King, i, 321-22.

1105

Madison to Pendleton, March 3, 1788 (Writings: Hunt, v, 110), and to Washington, March 3, 1788 (ib., 111); and to Randolph; March 3, 1788 (ib., 113).

1106

Langdon to King, May 6, 1788; King, i, 328.

1107

Washington to Lafayette, Feb. 7, 1788; Writings: Ford, xi, 220.

1108

Marshall, ii, 127.

1109

Ib.

1110

Washington to Madison, Jan. 10, 1788; Writings: Ford, xi, 208.

1111

Though "practical," these methods were honorable, as far as the improper use of money was concerned.

1112

King to Langdon, June 10, 1788; King, i, 331.