The Birth of the Republic. Compiled from ... the American archives, etc

Front matter

oSZ^l^^^L^ THE BIRTH OF THE REPUBLIC COMPILED FROM THE National and Colonial Histories and Historical Collections, from the American Archives and from Memoirs, and from the Journals and Proceedings of the British Parliament EV DANIEL R. GOODLOE J^ CONTAINING The Resolutions, Declarations, and Addresses adopted by the Continental Congress, the Provincial Congresses, Conventions and Assemblies, of the County and Town Meetings, and the Committees of Safety, in all the Colonies, from the Year 1765 to 1776 TO WHICH IS ADDED The Articles of Confederation, a History of the Formation and Adoption of the Constitution, the Election of President Washington, bis Inauguration, April 30, 1789, a Copy of the Constitution, and "Washington's Inaugural Speech Chicago, New York, and San Francisco BELFORD, CLARKE AND COMPANY PUBLISHERS Copyright, 1889, BY DANIEL R. GOODLOE.

Introduction

. That the American Colonies were destined to become in dependent of Great Britain, and that the occurrence of the event was only a question of time, was foreseen nearly a century before it came to pass. Lord Mansfield, in his speech in the House of Lords, on the Duke of Grafton's motion for an address to the King, November 15, 1775, makes this fact clear by the following statement, which at the same time exhibits the shop-keeping narrowness and illibe rality of his own mind. He says : "The bad consequences of planting Northern Colonies were early predicted. Sir Josiah Child foretold, before the Revolution [the English Revolution of 1688-'89], that they would, in the end, prove our rivals in power, commerce, and manufactures. Davenant, adopting the same ideas, foresaw what has since happened : he foresaw that, whenever Amer ica found herself of sufficient strength to contend with the mother-country, she would endeavor to form herself into a separate and independent State.

This has been the con stant object of New England almost from her earliest in fancy. Their struggles in the reign of King William com pelled that Prince to recall their former charter and give them a new one, and, towards the conclusion of his reign, to get an act passed that no law enacted in the Colonies should be valid, if contrary to any law at the time ex isting in England. Those disputes scarce subsided from that day to this. I remember, in 1733, Mr. Talbot (after wards counsellor) proposed a set of Resolutions, in the House of Commons, in which the nature of the disputes then subsisting were directly pointed at, and similar doc trines to those maintained at present by the British Parlia ment fully asserted." This citation from the speech of Lord Mansfield demon strates the truth that a man may be a great lawyer, and at the same time be a very narrow-minded statesman — that he may be profoundly learned in the laws, and be pre-eminently fitted to expound them, without having the slightest qualification to make laws.

Here, to the westward of the Atlantic Ocean, lay a continent all untilled, and almost unpeopled. Lord Mansfield would have suffered it to remain in a state

INTRODUCTION.

. 4 of perpetual barbarism, and have doomed his countrymen at home for all time to all the inconveniences of an over crowded, starving condition, for fear that at some remote day the colonists of the New World might assert their inde pendence and become the commercial and manufacturing rivals of Great Britain. His legal lore and training failed to convey to his mind the thought that the growth of the Colonies in wealth and population, and the development of commerce and manufactures among them, must redound to the advantage of the mother-country. And beyond the con sideration of profit to Great Britain, he seems never to have permitted his wandering thoughts to stray; but, with the genuine shop-keeping dread of competition, he would have suffered half the earth to go unpeopled lest he might inad vertently raise up a commercial rival to his own little island.

In the same speech, his lordship goes on to say : " I do not think that America complains of particular in juries, so much as she does of the violation of her rights. If I do not mistake, in one place the Congress sum up the whole of their grievances in the passage of the Declaratory Act, which asserts the supremacy of Great Britain, or the power of making laws for America in all cases whatsoever. This is the true bone of contention. They positively deny the right, not the mode of exercising it. They would allow the King of Great Britain a nominal sovereignty over them, but nothing else. They would throw off the dependency on the Crown of Great Britain, but not on the person of the King, whom they would render a cipher. In fine, they would stand in relation to Great Britain as Hanover now stands, or, more properly speaking, as Scotland stood to wards England previous to the treaty of Union.

His lordship then went into a variety of detailed reasonings to show that the views of America were directed to inde pendence ; that Great Britain could not concede without re hnquishing the whole, which he supposed was not intended; and that, consequently, any measure of conciliation, in the present situation of affairs and the declared intentions of America, would answer no end but furnishing her with grounds to erect new claims on, or to hold out terms of pretended obedience and submission." It is not true, as stated by Lord Mansfield, that America aimed at independence; and of the contrary truth an abundance of evidence is furnished in this compilation. That the tendency of events was necessarily towards inde pendence, will be conceded: but, on the other hand, the question arises as to which party was giving the greatest momentum to that tendency ; and the answer to the ques tion will depend upon the bias of the mind. To all men who sympathize with our ancestors in their struggle for liberty and independence, it is clear that the short-sighted

INTRODUCTION.

. 5 selfishness and arbitrary pride of spirit of the British Tories precipitated the war, and made a Declaration of Independ ence a necessary measure of defence. To the man of Tory sympathies, it is equally clear that the Declaration of Inde pendence was premeditated and planned by ambitious dema gogues, who took that method of getting the control of affairs into their own hands. But the objection to this latter statement is that the haz ards were too great to be encountered by demagogues, for the sake of office. Demagogues, by their very -nature, as the term implies, are a pliant, accommodating race ; and are prone to yield to circumstances, rather than conquer them. It has been well said that the same elements of character which constitute the demagogues in a popular government enter into and make up the courtier under a monarchy.

The men who led our armies to victory during the Revolution, and who framed our free constitutions and laws, were, many of them, foremost in the esteem of the rulers of Great Britain before they thought of resistance. All the older officers of the army had served with honor under the King, and their names were held in high respect at court. Franklin was Postmaster-general of the Colonies; and hundreds besides him were in high favor as civilians. They had therefore no occasion to revolt and set up a new form of government in order to secure the offices. By their heroic self-sacrifice, by their courage and perseverance in what for years seemed an almost hopeless enterprise, and by the wisdom displayed on the tented field and in the council, they gained, among friends and foes the world over, the highest reputation for virtue.

The idea of such men being actuated by a low ambi tion to secure places for themselves is therefore simply pre posterous. It is undoubtedly true that the government of Great Brit ain practised great injustice towards the Colonists by send ing over profligate younger sons and the abandoned min ions of the courtiers to fill the high offices ; but bad as this system was, it was not the direct cause of the Revolution. It certainly tended to produce revolt, by interposing, between the mother -country and the Colonies, a class of pimps and spies, whose policy it was to make themselves acceptable at home by misrepresenting the state of things in America, and by favoring every arbitrary measure of min istry. But it was those arbitrary measures that produced the rupture ; and not the unworthy instruments of administration.

America made a successful rebellion at a time when the population was not above three millions. How idle the no tion, then, that Great Britain could continue long to rule these colonies, inhabited by a free, energetic race which doubles in number four times in a century !

Chapter I. The Stamp

ACT— THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS OF 1765. The following account of the Continental Convention of 1765, which met in New York, is from the fifth volume of "Bancroft's History of the United States:" " On Monday, the 7th of October, delegates chosen by the House of Representatives of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and South Carolina ; delegates named by a written requisition from the individual representatives of Delaware and New Jersey ; and the legislative Committee of Correspondence of New York,— met at New York in Congress. New Hampshire, though not present by deputy, yet agreed to abide by the result ; and they were gladdened during this session by the arrival of the expressmessenger from Georgia, sent near a thousand miles by land, to obtain a copy of their proceedings."

It is proper to explain, in this place, that North Carolina was not represented in this general congress of the Colonies, for the reason that the Assembly was not in session at any time after the proposition of Massachusetts to call such a body. Rumors having reached the province in the spring, that the Stamp Act had been passed by Parliament and approved by the King, the same spirit of opposition to its enforcement was manifested in all the principal towns of North Carolina that had been exhibited in the northern Colonies ; and this caused the Lieutenant-governor, Tryon, to prorogue the Assembl y from May until November, lest that body might give expression to the popular feeling, as it undoubtedly would have done. See "Martin's History of North Carolina," vol. 2, pages 193 and 195. Mr. Bancroft continues: " The members of this first union of the American people were elected by the representatives of the people of each separate Colony.

While they formed one body, their power was derived from independent sources. Each of the Colonies existed in its individuality ; and notwithstanding great differ ences in their respective population and extent of territory, as they met in Congress they recognized each other as equals," without the least claim of pre-eminence, one over the other. "The Congress entered directly on the consideration of the safest groundwork on which to vest the collective Amer ican liberties. Should they budd on charters, or on material justice ? on precedents and fact or abstract truth ? on special privileges or universal reason ? Otis was instructed by Bos ton to support, not only the liberty of the Colonies, but also chartered rights. Johnson, of Connecticut, submitted a paper, which pleaded charters from the Crown, but Robert R. Livingston, of New York, ' the goodness of whose heart set him above prejudices, and equally comprehended all mankind,' would not place the hope of America on that foundation; and Gadsden, of South Carolina, giving utter ance to the warm impulses of a brave and noble nature, spoke against it with irresistible impetuosity. ' A confirma tion of our essential and common rights as Englishmen,' thus he himself reports his sentiments, 'may be pleaded from charters safely enough; but any further dependence upon them may be fatal.

We should stand upon the broad common ground of those natural rights that we all feel and know as men, and as descendants of Englishmen. I wish the charters may not ensnare us at last, by drawing different Colonies to act differently in this cause. Whenever that is the case, aU will be over with the whole. There ought to be no New England man, no New Yorker, known on the continent, but all of us Americans.' "These views prevaded; and in the proceedings of the Congress, the argument for American liberty from royal f rants was avoided. This is the first great step toward inependence. Dummer had pleaded for Colony charters- Livingston, Gadsden, and the Congress of 1765 provided for American's self-existence and union by claiming rights that preceded charters, and would survive their views. " And how far would that Union extend ?

What nations would be included m the name of Americans ? The members of that Congress believed themselves responsible for the liberties of the continent ; and even while they were delib erating the vast prairies of Illinois, the great eastern valley of the Mississippi, with all its rivers gushing from the Alle ghanies, with all its boundless primeval forests spreading from the mountain tops to the alluvial margin of the mighty stream, with all its solitudes, in which futurity would sum mon the eager millions of so many tongues to budd happy homes, passed from the sway of France into the temporary custody of England. * J "The conduct of America was regulated by the Congress at New York. Those who compose it, said Gage, are "of various characters and opinions ; but in general, the spirit of democracy is strong among them, supporting the independence of the provinces as not subject to the legislative power of Great Britain.

The question is not of the inexpe diency of the Stamp Act, but that it is unconstitutional, and contrary to their rights." No Colony was better represented than South Carolina. Her delegation gave a chief or two of the three great committees, and in all that was done well, her mind visibly appeared. "The difficult task of defining the rights and 'setting forth the liberty' which America 'ought to enjoy,' led the Assembly to debate for two weeks on ' liberty, privileges, and prerogative.' In these debates, Otis, of Boston, himself the father of the Congress, displayed great knowledge of the interests of America, and assisted to kindle the fires which afterwards lighted the country on to freedom. "It was proposed to ' insist upon a repeal of all acts laying duties on trade, as well as the Stamp Act.' ' If we do not make an explicit acknowledgment of the power of Britain to regulate our trade, ' said the too gentle Livingston, 'she wiU never give up the point of internal taxation.' But he was combatted with great heat, till at last the Congress, by the hand of Rutledge, of South Carolina, erased from the declaration of rights the unguarded concession; and the restricictions on American commerce, though practically acquiesced in, were enumerated as grievances.

Still Gadsden and Lynch were not satisfied. With vigorous dialectics, they proceeded, from a denial of the power of Parliament in America, to deny the propriety of approach ing either House with a petition. ' The House of Commons,' reasoned Gadsden, with the persevering earnestness of con viction, 'refused to receive the addresses of the Colonies when the matter was pending ; besides, we neither hold our rights from them nor from the Lords.' But yielding to the majority, Gadsden suppressed his opposition ; ' for,' said he, 'union is most certainly all in all.' " The carefully considered documents in which the Con gress embodied the demands of America, dwell mainly on the inherent right to trial by jury, in opposition to the ex tension of the admiralty jurisdiction, and the right to freedom from taxation, except through the respective Colonial legislatures.

These were promulgated in the Declaratory Resolutions, with the further assertion that the people of the Colonies not only are not, but, from their local circum stances, never can be, represented in the House of Commons in Great Britain ; that taxes never have been, nor never can be, constitutionally imposed on the Colonies but by their respective legislatures ; that all supplies to the Crown are free gifts; and that for the people of Great Britain to grant the property of the Colonists was neither reasonable nor consistent with tbe principles, nor with the spirit, of the British Constitution. The same immunities were claimed in the Address to the King, as ' essential principles, inherent rights and liberties,' of which the security was necessary to the ' most effectual connection of America with the British empire.' They also formed the theme of the Memorial to the House of Lords, mingled with complaints of the ' late restrictions on trade.' "Having thus insisted on their rights in strong terms, the Congress purposely employed a different style in the address to the House of Commons, insisting chiefly on the disadvan tages the new measure might occasion, as well to the mother country as to the Colonies.

They disclaimed for America the ' impracticable' idea of representation in any but Ameri can legislatures. Acknowledging ' all due subordination to the Parliament of Great Britain,' and extolling the 'English Constitution as the most perfect form of government,' the source of 'all their civil and religious liberties,' they argued that, in reason and sound policy, there exists a material dis tinction between the exercise of a Parliamentary jurisdiction in general acts of legislation for the amendment of the com mon law or the regulation of trade through the whole em pire, and the exercise of that jurisdiction by imposing taxes on the Colonies from which they therefore entreated to be relieved. "While the Congress were still anxiously engaged in weigh ing eachword and phrase they were to adopt, it was rumored that a ship laden with stamps had arrived. . . .

"On the morning of the 25th [October], the anniversary of the accession of George III. , the Congress assembled for the last time, and the delegates of six Colonies, being empow ered to do so,— namely, all the delegates from Massachusetts, except Ruggles ; all from New Jersey, except Ogden ; all those of Rhode Island; all of Pennsylvania, excepting Dickinson, who was absent, but adhered ; all of Delaware ; and all of Maryland ; with the virtual assent of New Hampshire, Con necticut, New York, South Carolina, and Georgia, — set their hands to the papers, by which the Colonies became, as they expressed it, 'a bundle of sticks, which could neither be bent nor broken.' " To the foregoing general account of the proceedings of the Congress, given by Mr. Bancroft, it is deemed proper to an nex the following Declaration of Rights, which may be found in "Burke's History of Virginia:" DECLARATION of rights.

"The members of this Congress, sincerely devoted with the warmest sentiments of affection and duty to his Majesty's person and government, inviolably attached to the present establishment of the Protestant succession, and with minds deeply impressed with a sense of the present and impending misfortunes of the British Colonies on this continent, having considered as maturely as time wdl permit the circumstan ces of said Colonies, esteem it chir indispensable duty to make the following declarations of our humble opinion respecting the most essential rights and liberties of the Colo nists and of the grievances under which they labor by reason of several late acts of Parliament : " I. That his Majesty's subjects in these Colonies owe the same allegiance to the Crown of Great Britain that is owing from his subjects born within the realm and all due sub ordination to that august body, the Parliament of Great Britain.

" II. That his Majestys' 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. " III. 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 consent, given personally or by their representatives. " IV. That the people of these Colonies are not, and, from their local circumstances, cannot be, represented in the House of Commons of Great Britain. " V. That the only representatives of the people of these Colonies are persons chosen therein by themselves, and that no taxes ever have been, or can be constitutionally im posed on them but by their own respective legislatures. "VI. That all supplies to the Crown, being free gifts of the people, it is unreasonable and inconsistent with the princi ples and spirit of the British Constitution for the people of Great Britain to grant to his Majesty the property of the Colonists.

"VII. That trial by jury is the inherent and invaluable right of every British subject in these Colonies. "VIII. 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 tbe inhabitants of these Colonies, and the said act, and several other 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. "IX. That the duties imposed by several late acts of Par liament, from the peculiar circumstances of these Colonies, will be extremely burthensome and grievous, and, from the scarcity of specie, the payment of them absolutely imprac ticable. " X. That as the profits of the trade of these Colonies ultimately centre in Great Britain to pay for the manufactures which they are obhged to take from thence, they eventually contribute very largely to all supplies granted there to the Crown.

"XI. That the restrictions imposed by several acts of Par liament, on the trade of these Colonies, will render them un able to purchase the manufactures of Great Britain. "XII. That the increase, prosperity, and happiness of these Colonies depend on the full and free enjoyment of their rights and liberties, and an intercourse with Great Britain mutually affectionate and advantageous. "XIII. That it is the right of the British subjects in these Colonies to petition the King or either House of Parliament. "Lastly, that it is the indispensable duty of these Colo nies, to the best of sovereigns, to the mother-country, and to themselves, to endeavor, by a loyal and dutiful address to his Majesty and humble applications to both Houses of Parlia ment, to procure the repeal of the Act for Granting and Ap plying Certain Stamp Duties, of all clauses of any other acts of Parliament whereby the jurisdiction of the Admiralty is extended as aforesaid, and of the other late acts for the re striction of American Commerce."

The Congress sent addresses to the King and to the House of Commons, which endeavor by argument and persuasion, rather than remonstrance, to induce a repeal of the obnox ious acts of Parliament. Mr. Bancroft has explained that the action of this Congress was signed and approved by delegates from only six Colo nies, the other delegates present not having authority ; and it may be added that Virginia and North Carolina were not represented because their Assemblies were not in session. MR. PITT'S SPEECH ON THE STAMP ACT. At the meeting of Parliament in January, 1766, the new administration of the Marquis of Rockingham, which had recently succeeded that of Grenville, exhibited signs of re ceding from the policy of the Stamp Act, and several members spoke in manly strains in behalf of the rights of the Colo nists.

Among these was the celebrated William Pitt, after wards Earl of Chatham. His health was very feeble, and for a long time he had not appeared in the House ; but on this occasion he said to his friends : ' ' My resolution is taken, and, if I can crawl or be carried, I will deliver my mind and heart upon the state of America." In reply to the argument of the friends of the Ministry in favor of the right and duty of imposing a tax on America, he said : " I speak not with respect to parties : I stand upon this place single, unsolicited, and unconnected. As to the late Minis try," turning scornfully towards Grenville, " every capital measure they have taken is entirely wrong. To the present Ministry, to those at least whom I have in my eye," look ing at Con way and the Lords of the Treasury, " I have no objection.

Their characters are fair. But, pardon me, gentlemen, youth is the season of credulity ; confidence is a plant of slow growth in an aged bosom. By comparing even':1 with each other, reasoning from effects to causes, methinks I discover the traces [referring to the Duke of New Castle] of over-ruling influences. "It is a long time," he continued, "since I have attended in Parliament. When the resolution was taken in the House, to tax America, I was ill in bed. If I could have endured to be carried in my bed, so great was the agitation of my mind for the consequences, I would have solicited some kind hand to have laid me down on this floor, to have borne my testimony against it. It is now an act that has passed. I would speak with decency of every act of this House, but I must beg indulgence to speak of it with freedom.

The subject of this debate is of greater importance than ever engaged the attention of this House, that subject only excepted when nearly a century ago, it was a question whether you yourselves were to be bond or free. The manner in which this affair will be terminated will decide the judgment of posterity on the glory of this kingdom, and the wisdom of its government, during the present reign. "As my health and life are so very infirm and precarious that I may not be able to attend on tbe day that may be fixed by the House for the consideration of America, I must now, though somewhat unseasonably, leaving the expediency of the Stamp Act to another time, speak to a point of infinite moment, I mean, to the right. Some seem to have considered it as a point of honor, and leave all measures of right and wrong to follow a delusion that may lead us to destruction.

On a question that may mortally wound the freedom of three millions of brave and virtuous subjects beyond the Atlantic Ocean, being neither really nor virtually represented in Westminister, cannot be held legally, or constitutionally, or reasonably subject to obedience to any money bill of this kingdom. The Colonies are equally entitled with yourselves to all the natural rights of mankind and the peculiar privileges of Englishmen ; equally bound by the laws ; and equally participative of the Constitution of this free country. The Americans are the sons, not tbe bas tards, of England ! As subjects, they are entitled to the common right of representation, and cannot be bound to pay taxes without their consent. Taxation is no part of the governing power. The taxes, —a voluntary gift and grant of the commons alone.

In an American tax, what do we do ? We, your Majesty's commons of Great Britain, give and grant to your Majesty— what, our own property ? No. We give and grant to your Majesty the property of your Majes ty's commons in America. It is an absurdity in terms. " There is an idea in some that the Colonies are virtually represented in this House. They never have been repre sented at all in Parliament; they were not even virtually represented at the time when this law, as captious as it is iniquitous, was passed to deprive them of the most inestimable of their privileges. I would fain know by whom an American is represented here ! Is he represented by any knight of a shire in any county of this kingdom ? Would to God that respectable representation was augmented to a greater number. Or will you tell him that he is represented by any representative of a borough ?

A borough which perhaps no man ever saw. This is what is called the rotten part of the Constitution. It cannot endure the century ! If it does not drop, it must be amputated. The idea of a virtual representation of America in this House is the most con temptible that ever entered into the head of a man. It does not deserve a serious refutation. "The commons of America, represented in their several Assemblies, have ever been in the 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. "And how is the right of taxing the Colonies internally compatible with that of framing regulations, without num ber, for their trade ? The laws of this kind which Par liament is daily making prove that they form a body sepa rate from Great Britain.

While you hold their manufac tures in the most servile restraint, will you add a new tax to deprive them of the last remnants of their liberty ? This would be to plunge them into the most odious slavery, against which their charters should protect them. . . . "I never shall own the justice of taxing America inter nally until she enjoys the right of representation." See American Archives. Mr. Pitt proceeded to claim for Great Britain the right to regulate the external trade of the Colonists, and to prohibit manufacturing — a doctrine not at all consistent with the gen erous sentiments above quoted. In reply to Grenville, he again rose, and said : "Sorry I am to hear the liberty of speech in this House imputed as a crime. But the imputation shall not discourage me ; it is a liberty I mean to exercise.