http://www.arcamax.com/nonfiction/b-1053-1
The Fathers of the Constitution
THE FATHERS OF THE CONSTITUTION, A CHRONICLE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
THE UNION
BY MAX FARRAND
NEW HAVEN: YALE UNIVERSITY PRESS TORONTO: GLASGOW, BROOK & CO. LONDON:
HUMPHREY MILFORD OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
1921
CONTENTS
I. THE TREATY OF PEACE
II. TRADE AND INDUSTRY
III. THE CONFEDERATION
IV. THE NORTHWEST ORDINANCE
V. DARKNESS BEFORE DAWN
VI. THE FEDERAL CONVENTION
VII. FINISHING THE WORK
VIII. THE UNION ESTABLISHED
APPENDIX
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
NOTES ON THE PORTRAITS OF THE MEMBERS OF THE FEDERAL CONVENTION
FATHERS OF THE CONSTITUTION
CHAPTER I. THE TREATY OF PEACE
"The United States of America"! It was in the Declaration of
Independence that this name was first and formally proclaimed to the
world, and to maintain its verity the war of the Revolution was
fought. Americans like to think that they were then assuming "among
the Powers of the Earth the equal and independent Station to which the
Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them"; and, in view of
their subsequent marvelous development, they are inclined to add that
it must have been before an expectant world.
In these days of prosperity and national greatness it is hard to
realize that the achievement of independence did not place the United
States on a footing of equality with other countries and that, in
fact, the new state was more or less an unwelcome member of the world
family. It is nevertheless true that the latest comer into the family
of nations did not for a long time command the respect of the world.
This lack of respect was partly due to the character of the American
population. Along with the many estimable and excellent people who had
come to British North America inspired by the best of motives, there
had come others who were not regarded favorably by the governing
classes of Europe. Discontent is frequently a healthful sign and a
forerunner of progress, but it makes one an uncomfortable neighbor in
a satisfied and conservative community; and discontent was the
underlying factor in the migration from the Old World to the New. In
any composite immigrant population such as that of the United States
there was bound to be a large element of undesirables. Among those who
came "for conscience's sake" were the best type of religious
protestants, but there were also religious cranks from many countries,
of almost every conceivable sect and of no sect at all. Many of the
newcomers were poor. It was common, too, to regard colonies as
inferior places of residence to which objectionable persons might be
encouraged to go and where the average of the population was lowered
by the influx of convicts and thousands of slaves.
"The great number of emigrants from Europe"--wrote Thieriot, Saxon
Commissioner of Commerce to America, from Philadelphia in 1784--"has
filled this place with worthless persons to such a degree that
scarcely a day passes without theft, robbery, or even assassination."*
It would perhaps be too much to say that the people of the United
States were looked upon by the rest of the world as only half
civilized, but certainly they were regarded as of lower social
standing and of inferior quality, and many of them were known to be
rough, uncultured, and ignorant. Great Britain and Germany maintained
American missionary societies, not, as might perhaps be expected, for
the benefit of the Indian or negro, but for the poor, benighted
colonists themselves; and Great Britain refused to commission a
minister to her former colonies for nearly ten years after their
independence had been recognized.
* Quoted by W. E. Lingelbach, "History Teacher's Magazine," March,
1913.
It is usually thought that the dregs of humiliation have been reached
when the rights of foreigners are not considered safe in a particular
country, so that another state insists upon establishing therein its
own tribunal for the trial of its citizens or subjects. Yet that is
what the French insisted upon in the United States, and they were
supposed to be especially friendly. They had had their own experience
in America. First the native Indian had appealed to their imagination.
Then, at an appropriate moment, they seemed to see in the Americans a
living embodiment of the philosophical theories of the time: they
thought that they had at last found "the natural man" of Rousseau and
Voltaire; they believed that they saw the social contract theory being
worked out before their very eyes. Nevertheless, in spite of this
interest in Americans, the French looked upon them as an inferior
people over whom they would have liked to exercise a sort of
protectorate. To them the Americans seemed to lack a proper knowledge
of the amenities of life. Commissioner Thieriot, describing the
administration of justice in the new republic, noticed that: "A
Frenchman, with the prejudices of his country and accustomed to court
sessions in which the officers have imposing robes and a uniform that
makes it impossible to recognize them, smiles at seeing in the court
room men dressed in street clothes, simple, often quite common. He is
astonished to see the public enter and leave the court room freely,
those who prefer even keeping their hats on." Later he adds: "It
appears that the court of France wished to set up a jurisdiction of
its own on this continent for all matters involving French subjects."
France failed in this; but at the very time that peace was under
discussion Congress authorized Franklin to negotiate a consular
convention, ratified a few years later, according to which the
citizens of the United States and the subjects of the French King in
the country of the other should be tried by their respective consuls
or vice-consuls. Though this agreement was made reciprocal in its
terms and so saved appearances for the honor of the new nation,
nevertheless in submitting it to Congress John Jay clearly pointed out
that it was reciprocal in name rather than in substance, as there were
few or no Americans in France but an increasing number of Frenchmen in
the United States.
Such was the status of the new republic in the family of nations when
the time approached for the negotiation of a treaty of peace with the
mother country. The war really ended with the surrender of Cornwallis
at Yorktown in 1781. Yet even then the British were unwilling to
concede the independence of the revolted colonies. This refusal of
recognition was not merely a matter of pride; a division and a
consequent weakening of the empire was involved; to avoid this Great
Britain seems to have been willing to make any other concessions that
were necessary. The mother country sought to avoid disruption at all
costs. But the time had passed when any such adjustment might have
been possible. The Americans now flatly refused to treat of peace upon
any footing except that of independent equality. The British, being in
no position to continue the struggle, were obliged to yield and to
declare in the first article of the treaty of peace that "His
Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States . . . to be
free, sovereign, and independent states."
With France the relationship of the United States was clear and
friendly enough at the time. The American War of Independence had been
brought to a successful issue with the aid of France. In the treaty of
alliance which had been signed in 1781 had been agreed that neither
France nor the United States should, without the consent of the other,
make peace with Great Britain. More than that, in 1781, partly out of
gratitude but largely as a result of clever manipulation of factions
in Congress by the French Minister in Philadelphia, the Chevalier de
la Luzerne, the American peace commissioners had been instructed "to
make the most candid and confidential communications upon all subjects
to the ministers of our generous ally, the King of France; to
undertake nothing in the negotiations for peace or truce without their
knowledge and concurrence; and ultimately to govern yourselves by
their advice and opinion."* If France had been actuated only by
unselfish motives in supporting the colonies in their revolt against
Great Britain, these instructions might have been acceptable and even
advisable. But such was not the case. France was working not so much
with philanthropic purposes or for sentimental reasons as for the
restoration to her former position of supremacy in Europe. Revenge
upon England was only a part of a larger plan of national
aggrandizement.
* "Secret Journals of Congress." June 15, 1781.
The treaty with France in 1778 had declared that war should be
continued until the independence of the United States had been
established, and it appeared as if that were the main purpose of the
alliance. For her own good reasons France had dragged Spain into the
struggle. Spain, of course, fought to cripple Great Britain and not to
help the United States. In return for this support France was pledged
to assist Spain in obtaining certain additions to her territory. In so
far as these additions related to North America, the interests of
Spain and those of the United States were far from being identical; in
fact, they were frequently in direct opposition. Spain was already in
possession of Louisiana and, by prompt action on her entry into the
war in 1780, she had succeeded in getting control of eastern Louisiana
and of practically all the Floridas except St. Augustine. To
consolidate these holdings and round out her American empire, Spain
would have liked to obtain the title to all the land between the
Alleghany Mountains and the Mississippi. Failing this, however, she
seemed to prefer that the region northwest of the Ohio River should
belong to the British rather than to the United States.
Under these circumstances it was fortunate for the United States that
the American Peace Commissioners were broad-minded enough to
appreciate the situation and to act on their own responsibility.
Benjamin Franklin, although he was not the first to be appointed, was
generally considered to be the chief of the Commission by reason of
his age, experience, and reputation. Over seventy-five years old, he
was more universally known and admired than probably any man of his
time. This many-sided American--printer, almanac maker, writer,
scientist, and philosopher--by the variety of his abilities as well as
by the charm of his manner seemed to have found his real mission in
the diplomatic field, where he could serve his country and at the same
time, with credit to himself, preach his own doctrines.
When Franklin was sent to Europe at the outbreak of the Revolution, it
was as if destiny had intended him for that particular task. His
achievements had already attracted attention; in his fur cap and
eccentric dress "he fulfilled admirably the Parisian ideal of the
forest philosopher"; and with his facility in conversation, as well as
by the attractiveness of his personality, he won both young and old.
But, with his undoubted zeal for liberty and his unquestioned love of
country, Franklin never departed from the Quaker principles he
affected and always tried to avoid a fight. In these efforts, owing to
his shrewdness and his willingness to compromise, he was generally
successful.
John Adams, being then the American representative at The Hague, was
the first Commissioner to be appointed. Indeed, when he was first
named, in 1779, he was to be sole commissioner to negotiate peace; and
it was the influential French Minister to the United States who was
responsible for others being added to the commission. Adams was a
sturdy New Englander of British stock and of a distinctly English
type-- medium height, a stout figure, and a ruddy face. No one
questioned his honesty, his straightforwardness, or his lack of tact.
Being a man of strong mind, of wide reading and even great learning,
and having serene confidence in the purity of his motives as well as
in the soundness of his judgment, Adams was little inclined to
surrender his own views, and was ready to carry out his ideas against
every obstacle. By nature as well as by training he seems to have been
incapable of understanding the French; he was suspicious of them and
he disapproved of Franklin's popularity even as he did of his
personality.
Five Commissioners in all were named, but Thomas Jefferson and Henry
Laurens did not take part in the negotiations, so that the only other
active member was John Jay, then thirty-seven years old and already a
man of prominence in his own country. Of French Huguenot stock and
type, he was tall and slender, with somewhat of a scholar's stoop, and
was usually dressed in black. His manners were gentle and unassuming,
but his face, with its penetrating black eyes, its aquiline nose and
pointed chin, revealed a proud and sensitive disposition. He had been
sent to the court of Spain in 1780, and there he had learned enough to
arouse his suspicious, if nothing more, of Spain's designs as well as
of the French intention to support them.