Georgia and state rights

Front matter

Book_. ■ r\^ Co

AMERICAN HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION.

GEORGIA AND STATE RIGHTS.

Preface

As a result of listening to a \eiy suggestive lecture b}- Dr. F. J. Turner upon American sectionalism, I set to work some years ago to study the efl'ect of nullification upon Georgia politics. The search for information in the Georgia newspapers of the nullification period quickly showed me that I had to deal with numerous complexities in the local field which to be understood needed more than a knowledge of the main current of American politics. The conditions in Georgia had been ev^olved through the influence of men and events now long forgotten, and those local conditions were destined to iuiportance in shaping the history of the country at large. The study of the whole situation with its recurring changes has proved absorbing. My eftort has been to seek out the causes of things, and to follow developments to their conclusion. T'he work has expanded, almost of itself, until it has reached the present compass of a complete surve}^ of the antebellum period of the State's history. I have declined to adopt the suggestion of several gentlemen who have wished me to add the period of the Civil War and Reconstruction to my view, because the cataclysm of the sixties is foreign to the sequence of my narrative. The discussion of that decade would involve so many new influences and complications that the unity of the monograph would be destroyed.

It is not difficult for one whose native environment is the Cotton Belt to orient himself into antebellum Georgia. I have made little use, however, of the historical imagination.

(> PEEFACE.

The method is that of the investigator rather than the literary historian. The work is intended to ])e a thorough scientific treatment of its siil)]"ect. No pains have been spared in obtaining exhaustive and accurate information. I have juade research in person in every important library in America, and in several of those abroad, and have made use of a large amount of material which is in the possession of private individuals. The most useful collections of material for the work have been found in the University of Georgia Library, the Carnegie Library of Atlanta, the Congressional Library, and the libraries of the Historical Societies of Georgia, New York, and Wisconsin.

The two chapters dealing with the local parties in Georgia were submitted as a master's thesis at the University of Georgia in 1899. The monograph, as a whole, is ni}^ doctor's dissertation at Columbia University in 1902. For suggestions, criticism, and encouragement in the work, I am indebted to Dr. J. H. T. McPherson, of Athens, Ga., to Dr. F. J. Turner, of Madison, Wis., and especially to Dr. W. A. Dunning, of New York City. To these gentlemen 1 must express mv sincere gratitude. To numerous librarians, and to persons possessing manuscripts, newspapers, or other material which I have used, I can at this time only render a sweeping expression of thanks for courtesies shown me.

Ulrich B. Phillips.

Milledgeville, Georgia.

CHAPTER I.— THE ADOPTION OF THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION. Page

Condition of Georgia at the close of the Revolution 15

Attitude toward a union of the States 16

The confederation unsatisfactory 16

The Annapolis convention 17

Response of Georgia 17

The Constitutional Convention of 1787 17

Policy of the Georgia delegates 17

Georgia ratifies the Federal Constitution 21

Adopts a new State constitution 22

Case of Chisholm v. Georgia 24

Attitude of the State 26

The eleventh amendment 28

Georgia's Western lands 29

The Yazoo land sale 30

Popular indignation in Georgia 31

The sale rescinded 32

The purchasers protest 32

Attitude of Congress 32

Government established for the western territory 33

Remonstrance of Georgia, 1800 33

Conciliatory spirit 34

Cession of the Western lands, 1802 34

The Yazoo claims in Congress 35

Case of Fletcher ;;. Peck 36

Settlement of the claims 37

Foreign affairs 38

State rights in abeyance 38

CHAPTER II. — THE ACQUISITION OP THE CREEK LANDS. Creek cessions to the colony of Georgia 39

The Creeks in the American revolution 39

Indian affairs under the confederation 40

Treaties of Galphinton, Hopewell, and Shoulderbone 40

Dissatisfaction of the Creeks 41

Alexander McGillivray 41

Treaty of New York, 1790 42

8 CONTENTS.

Page.

Protest of Georgia - - 42

Theories of the Indian status -lo

Maraudings on the frontier 44

Exasperation of the Georgians 44

Concihation 45

Treaty at Coleraine - 46

Elijah Clarke 47

Illegal settlement up( >n Creek lands 47

Destroyed by the State government 48

Public opinion in Georgia 48

Creek cessions of 1802 and 1804 49

Conspiracy of the Western Creeks 50

Creek war, 1813-14. Andrew Jackson 51

Treaty of Fort Jackson 51

Cessions of 1818 and 1821 52

Impatience of Georgia for more lands 53

Tenacity of the Creeks 54

George M. Troup 55

Treaty of Indian Spring, 1 825 56

William Mcintosh 56

Factions among the Creeks 56

Mcintosh murdered 57

President Adams repudiates the treaty 58

Antagonism of Adams and Troup 58

Treaty of Washington, 1826 59

Governor Troup defies the President 63

Attitude of Congress 64

Cession of the remaining ( rjek lands in ( ieorgia 65

Early Cherokee cessions <>6

Cherokees in the American revolution 66

Tenacity of the tribe for its Georgia lands Vu

Cessions of 1817 and 1819 68

Refusal to make further cessions 69

The Cherokee chiefs "0

Attitude of the United States Government 70

Progress of the Indiana toward civilization 71

Attitude of Georgia "2

Discovery of gold in north (ieorgia 72

Conflict of authority "'"5

Laws of Georgia, 1830, destroy tiie Cherokee government 73

President Jackson 73

Judge A. S. Clayton "4

Chief Justice Marshall 74

Governor Gilmer 75

Tassel' s case 75

Case of the Ch(>rokee Nation /•. (ieorgia 76

CONTENTS. 9

Page.

The missionaries to the Cherokees 79

Worcester appeals to the Supreme Court 80

Policy of Go /ernor Lumpkin 81

Case of Worcester v. Georgia 81

Jackson refuses to enforce Marshall's decision 82

Graves' s case 84

The Cherokees despondent 84

Factions in the tribe 85

Treaty of New Echota, 1835 86

Removal of the Cherokees, 1838 86

CHAPTER IV. THE TROUP AXU CLARKE PARTIES. Continuity of parties in Georgia 87

Their economic and social basis 87

Influence of the streams of immigration 88

The frontier 89

Parties in the RevoUition 89

Federalist and Republican parties 90

Presidential election of 1796 91

Disappearance of the Federalist party 92

The rise of personal factions 93

James Jackson '. 94

William H. Crawford 94

The Broad River settlement of Virginians 96

The North Carolinian settlement 96

The South (jeorgia aristocrats 96

George M. Troup 97

John Clarke 97

Development of personal factions 98

Checked by the war of 1812 99

The election of governor, 1819, 1S21, and 1823 100

The gubernatorial campaign of 1825 103

Character of the local vote 104

Its relation to economic geography 105

Economic and social conditions 106

Presidential election of 1824 108

Period of quiet in politics, 1825 to 1S31 Ill

Indian affairs, 1825 Ill

Change of party names 112

CHAPTER V. THE STATE RIGHTS AND INIOX PARTIES. Quiescence on State sovereignty, 1798 to 1823 113

Origin of the protective tariff 113

Internal improvements 114

The Colonization Society 1 115

The struggle for State rights renewed 115

The tariff of 1828 '. 117

Andrew Jackson 119

10 CONTENTS.

Page.

The tariff of 1832 120

Constitutional interpretation 121

State rights 121

State sovereignty 122

Nullification 123

Th9 attitude of Georgia 124

Wilson Lumpkin 125

Election of governor, 1831 126

Character of the vote 127

State rights meetings 129

State sovereignty convention, November, 1832 130

Conservatism of the legislature 131

Local factions and leaders 132

Attitude of Georgians toward the Constitution 132

Augustin S. Clayton 133

John M. Berrien 133

George R. Gilmer 134

John Forsyth 134

William H. Crawford 134

George M. Trou}) 134

Wilson Lumpkin , 135

Election of governor, ; 1833 136

State Rights party convention, 1833 ^ 137

Presidential election, 1836 138

Local affairs, 1837 to 1840 139

Influence of economic geography 140

Progress and lack of progress 141

CHAPTER VI. THE WHIGS AND THE DEMOCRATS: SLAVERY. The origin of the Whig party 143

The opposition in Georgia to Andrew Jackson 143

Merging of the State Rights party with the Whigs 144

Merging of the Union party with the Democrats 146

Presidential campaign of 1840 147

Local questions 147

Campaign of 1844; Clay defeated 148

Status of slavery in Georgia 151

Colonial history 151

Laws regulating slaves .' 152

Patriarchal system 154

Free persons of color 155

Interstate slave trade 155

The cotton gin 157

The Colonization Society; its inefficiency 158

The abolition agitation . . S 158

Southern sensitiveness 159

The slavery cjuestion enters politics 161

Sectionalism in the national parties 162

CONTENTS. 11

Page.

The compromise of 1850 ^'^'^

Radical agitation in Georgia l^'""

Pacified l)y Toombs, Stephens, and Cobb l'^-*

The Georgia platform of 1850 ^^

Cobb elected governor, 1851 1*56

Presidential campaign of 1852 ^^'

Decline of the Whig party ^^^

Unstable alignment of the local parties 1|^'*

Attitude of Georgians toward the Union 1 '

CHAPTER VII. THE KANSAS-NEBRASKA STRU(4(iLE AND ITS KESll/rS. The Kansas-Nebraska bill of 1854 ^^1

Stephen A. Douglas ^^^

Popularity of the bill in the South Ip

The bill enacted into law ."■ 1^'^

Public sentiment for and against it l^-^

The struggle in Kansas ^^"^

The Democratic convention of 1856 1 ' '^

Factions in the party ^"J*

Desire of the South for slavery extension 1 75

The Dred Scott case • 1^^

Developments in Kansas 1 ' ^

Readjustment of political parties 17/^

The Know Nothings in Georgia 1 "

Policy of Robert Toombs and Alexander H. Stephens 178

Benjamin H. Hill 180

The Democratic party in Georgia, 1857 180

/Joseph E. Brown ^^^

Quiet in politics, 1858 182

Strength of the sectional feeling 183

The Republican party at the North 183

Rumors of war, 1859 185

John Brown's raid 186

Southern opinion solidified 187

The Democratic party in 1860 188

The convention at Charleston 188

Dilemma of the Georgians 189

Attitude of A. H. Stephens and H. V. Johnson 189

/Joseph E. Brown and Howell Cobb 189

Robert Toombs - 190

The Democratic convention at Baltimore 190

Douglas, Breckinridge, and Bell 191

Lincoln elected 191

Sentiment in Georgia 192

12 CONTENXe.

CHAPTER VIII. — THE SECESSION OF THE STATE OF (;EOR(UA. Page

Early theories of secession : The Hartford convention 193

Effect of the Kansas struggle in developing secession spiiit in

Georgia 193

Alarm at the growth of the llepulilican party 194

Lincoln's election 194

Governor Brown advises resistance to Northern aggression 194

Toomhs and Stephens 195

The legislature calls a convention of the people 196

Military preparations 197

Statement of Southern grievances 197

The radical leadership of the governor 197

Howell Cohb favors secession • 198

Stephens opposed to immediate secession 199

Toombs's dispatch, December 23, 1860 200

Election of delegates to the secession convention 201

Seizure of Fort Pulaski by Georgia forces 201

('haracter of the convention 202

Its proceedings 203

Adoption of the ordinance of secession 203

Attitude of the minority 204

The local vote in the Presidential election of 1860 206

Contrasted with the local attitude toward secession 206

Ciuestion of the conservatism of secession 207

Comparison of the courses pursued by Toombs 207

Howell Cobb 207

A. H. Stephens 207

H. Y. Johnson 207

E. A. Nisbet 208

B. H. Hill 208

Thomas R. II. Cobb 208

/Joseph E. Brown 208

C. J. Jenkins 208

Conclusion 210

BIULIOCJRAPHV.

Histories of Georgia 211

Local and special histories 212

Biographies and memoirs 213

Georgia laws 215

Public documents 21 5

Works on State rights and secession 216

Works on slavery 216

History of the Indians 217

Maps of Georgia 217

Files of Georgia newspapers 218

LIST OF MAPS OF GEORGIA.

Page.

1. Indian cessiony. (From Eighteenth Report Bureau American

Ethnology, with alterations) 40

2. Presidential election of 1796 ^^1

3. Census of 1800, whites and negroes 92

4. Gubernatorial election of 1825 104

5. Census of 1824, w^hites and negroes 10<i

6. Gubernatorial election of 1831 1 26

7. Products of the State, 1835 140

8. Presidential election of 1848 I'^O

9. Presidential election of 1860 -'05

10. Census of 1860, whites and negroes 2()(i

11 . N'ote on secession, 1860 209

12. The Georgia frontier, 1780 217

Chapter I. -the Adoption Of The Federal Constitution

The clo.se of the war for American independence found the little commonwealth of Georgia in a sadly disorganized condition so far as concerned finance and industry, but with a self -consciousness and an appreciation of its possibilities which had been brought into existence only by the stress of war times. The gain in public spirit far more than counterbalanced the loss of material goods. As a colony Georgia had been the most dependent of all the colonies; as a State she was destined for many years to struggle against tendencies which her citizens believed would bring about a greater tyranny than that from which they had escaped.

The course of events in the South during the Revolution developed certain strong opinions in Georgia which were subsequently of powerful influence. The dreadful warfare between Whig and Tory neighbors led to the conviction that while dift'erence of opinion in public afl'airs is natural and wholesome, the commonwealth ought to be united when once a polic}' has been adopted, and especially when an outside power is involved. An attempt of South Carolina to destroy the >

political existence of Georgia by merging the two States into / one aroused the indignation of Georgians and heightened their esteem for autonomy and independence.* The spread of a \ rumor, when the extreme South was in the hands of the British, J that peace was about to be made on the basis of the retention / of South Carolina and Georgia as colonies, while the independence of the other States was to be recognized, developed

<«C. C. Jones, History of Georgia, vol. 2, p. 275. W. B. Stevens, History of Georgia, vol. 2,P.B02. ^^ a lively anxiety for the preservation of the Union of the States," The proximity of powerful Indian tribes, and the Spanish possession of Florida, after 1783, made Georgia an outpost against two powers which might become hostile, and thus tended to further strengthen the desire among the citixens for a permanent arrangement looking to mutual support among the States. For several reasons, then, the State was in favor of a strong central government in control of international affairs and matters of broad scope, while on the other hand it was not willing to make a complete surrender of its own political independence. A federal system of government, and none other, would meet the requirements.

The arrangements by which the United States carried on the war against Great Britain had been little more than an ill-defined league between independent powers. The Articles of Confederation, which secured adoption only a short while before the cessation of hostilities, were hardly an improvement upon the preceding provisional organization. Month by month the unsatisfactory nature of the Confederation became more patent and more distressing to all citizens who looked to a prosperous career for the American people under a stable government, j^et large numbers of men were to ])e found in many of the States who were firmly opposed to any sacrifice of authority b}^ the members of the Confederation. Jealousies among the commonwealths and i-eal or fancied advantages which several of the States held ovei- their neighbors increased the difficulty in reaching a solution.

By the summer of 1786 the inefficiency of the confederate government had become intolerable, but the problem of securing improvements remained most delicate and complicated. The fact that it was accomplished in a short time, and without great confusion, demonstrates the adroitness and abilit}' of the statesmen of the time.

The convention which, upon the initiative of Virginia, assembled at Annapolis in 1786 to consider interstate questions of a commercial nature, was led by Alexander Hamilton to extend its view over the general field of American political

a Of. " Observations upon the effects of certain late political suggestions: by the delegates of Georgia" in the Continental Congress. This pamphlet, originally printed in 1781, was reprinted in a limited edition in the Wormsloe series in 1847. The text may also be found in White's Historical Collections of Georgia, pp. 10(i to 110, conditions. The result was the adoption on September 14, of a recommendation to the Cong-ress and to the legishitures of the several States represented at Annapolis that commissioners be appointed from each of the thirteen States to meet in Philadelphia in May of the next year "to devise such provisions as shall appear to them necessary to render the Constitution of the Federal Government adequate to the exigencies of the Union."" The Congress approved the plan and called the convention accordingly.

In response to the invitation which Georgia received, the assembly passed an ordinance February 10, 1787, appointing William Few, Abraham Baldwin, William Pierce, George Walton, William Houston, and Nathaniel Pendleton as commissioners for the convention.

The second Monday, or the 11th, of Ma^', 1787, had been set for the assembling of the convention, but a quorum of States was not obtained until the 25th of the month, when the regular sittings were begun. On that day William Few was present from Georgia, but by the State ordinance two delegates were required to attend before the State could be officially represented. Georgia had no vote in the convention until the arrival of Mr. Pierce, on May 31. Mr. Houston reached Philadelphia on June 7 and Mr. Baldwin on June 11. Messrs. Walton and Pendleton are nowhere mentioned as having attended.

Soon after the assembling of the convention it was decided that in it, as was the rule in Congress during the Confederation, each State represented should have one vote. Georgia used her vote constantly in advocating the policy of strengthening the central government. This was to be done by dejDriving the State legislatures of some of their powers without removing all authority from them. Mr. Baldwin, the most\^ influential member of the Georgia delegation, said in the con- \ vention on June 2!): "It appears to be agreed that the gov- \ ernment we should adopt ought to be energetic and formidable, / yet I would guard against the danger of being too formida- ' ble." His colleague, Mr. Pierce, expressed the same opinion on the same day.

"Jonathan Elliot, Debates on the Federal Constitution, vol. l,p. 118 ('Id edition)

Tluit the Georgia delegates acted in accord with public sentiment at home the following extracts from the cokirans of a contemporary Augusta newspaper will tend to show:

'* We hear with great satisfaction that the convention for revising the confederation is now assembled and doing business at Philadelphia. Among the many important matters to be taken under consideration by that august body the following are said to be the principles: 1st. That the Thirteen states be divided into three distinct Republics, who ought to leak together for their common defense as so many separate governments independent of each other; 2ndly. If the Thirteen states remain as they are confederated, to lessen their sovereignty by abolishing their State Legislatures and leaving the whole laws to be made by the national congress, assembly, or parliament; 3rdly. The Thirteen states to remain as they are, except that their laws be revised by Congress so as to make the whole act in conformity as of one, and the executive powers of Congress enlarged. It is nuich to be wished that the latter may be adopted.''"

When the debate began on the question as to whether representation in the National Assembly should be divided equally among the States or should be apportioned to the population. Georgia, in a measure, astonished the States of her own rank in strength and population by joining the side of the large States, seemingly against her own interests. This was accounted for by Luther Martin in his letter to the speaker of the house of delegates of Maryland:

"It may be thought surprising, sir, that Georgia, a State now small and comparatively trilling in the LTnion, should advocate this system of unequal representation, giving up her present equality in the Federal Government and sinking herself almost to total insignificance in the scale; but, sir, it must ])e considered that Georgia has the most extensive territory in the Union, being as large as the whole island of Great Britain and thirty times as large as Connecticut. This system being designed to preserve to the States their whole territory un])roken and to prevent the erection of new States within the territory of any of them, Georgia looked forward to when,

(( Georgia State Gazette or Independent Register, July 21, 1787. This weekly newspaper was published at Augusta by John E. Smith, printer to the SUite. It afterwards became the Augusta Chronicle.

aEORGIA AND STATE RIGHTS. 19

her population being increased in some measure proportional to her territory, she should rise in the scale and give law to the other States, and hence we found the delegation of Georgia warmly advocating the proposition of giving the States unequal representation.'"

The discussion of the method of election of Senators brought forth several speeches from the Georgia delegation. On June 6, Mr. Pierce spoke in favor of the election of the first branch of the National Legislature by the people and of the second hy the States, in order that the citizens of the States might be represented individually and collectively. On June 29, Mr. Baldwin declared that the second branch ought to be the representation of property and that it ought not to be elected as the first.

When the question was put as to whether each State should have an equal vote in the Senate, there was an exciting scene in the convention. Five States had voted on either side of the issue, and when Georgia's turn arrived to cast her ballot her delegates had the deciding voice. Mr. Baldwin had already made known his opinion as siding with the larger States, but from the fear of disrupting the convention he abandoned his intention, divided the vote of his State, and thus caused the motion to be lost by a tie."

In the apportionment of representation in the lower House South Carolina was given five seats and Georgia three. Both States made resolute efforts to increase their strength in the House, but were persistently voted down on every motion to that effect. The underlying reason for these attempts, which North Carolina and Virginia supported, was the desire to equalize the power of the South in the House with that of the North, which was given a slightly larger number of seats.

The principle of assignment of the seats was that each State should be entitled to one representative for ever}' 30,000 of its inhabitants, according to the authoritative estimate, with slaves counted as five to three. It was known that on this basis Georgia should not be assigned three members, but the argument was accepted that the "unexampled celerity of its population " would cause the State to be entitled to that number before the Constitution could be put in effect.^

When the (][uestion of legislating against the slave trade arose in the convention, South Carolina took an extreme position, with Georgia approving her contentions. The delegates of the two States threatened that if the importation of slaves were not allowed, their States would undoubtedly refuse to ratify' the Constitution. Mr. Baldwin suggested that, if left to herself, Georgia would probably put a stop to the trade. From this prophecy, which was fulfilled in a decade, and from other sidelights on the subject, we have reason to doubt that the prohibitory clause would have led to the rejection of the Constitution by Georgia. The North was forced to yield to the stubbornness of South Carolina, supported by Georgia and North Carolina. A compromise w^as hnally reached, which was embodied in Article 1, section 9, of the Constitution: "The migration or importation of such persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited l)y the Congress prior to the year eighteen hundred and eight, but a tax or duty may be imposed on such importation not exceeding ten dollars for each person.*"

The deliberations of the convention were brought to a close on September 17, 1787, and the engrossed Constitution was signed by delegates from each of the thirteen States except Rhode Island. The complete instrument was delivered to the Congress of the Confederation, which, on September 28, "Resolved unanimously that the said report, with the resolutions and letter accompanying the same, be transmitted to the several legislatures, in order to be submitted to a convention of delegates chosen in each State by the people thereof, in conformity to the resolves of the convention made and provided in that case."

A copy of the Constitution and accompanying resolutions reached Georgia in time for publication at Augusta, in the Gazette, October 13, and the resolution of the Congress to subn]it it to the States was published a week later. The State legislature happened to l)e in session at the time, and on October 25 it resolved that a convention be elected on the da}' of the next general election, to consist of not more than three members from each county, to meet at Augusta in December following, to consider the report and to reject or adopt any part or the whole thereof.

In the Georgia Gazette of December 15 there appears an article which states: '"'The t'ollov^dng• gentlemen are appointed in the convention for this State, and are the names only of

those who have come to hand: For Green County, —

Daniel, Robert Christmas, Middleton; for Wilkes

County, George Mathews, Florence Sullivan, King";

for Burke County, Edward Telfair, Dr. Todd, George Walton; for Glynn County, George Handley, Charles Hillery, John Milton."

In the issue of December 29 there appears under date of December 28: "Yesterday twenty-four mendjers of the State convention met in this town and, being a quorum, proceeded to the choice of a president, when the Hon. John Wereat, esq., was elected to that important office. Mr. Isaac Briggs was appointed secretary. Members returned from Liberty County to serve in the convention: James Powell, John Elliott, James Maxwell, esqs. ; for Effingham County, Jenkin Davis, Nathan Brown, Caleb Howell, esqs."

The Gazette of January 5, 1788, is quite disappointing, for it might naturally be expected to contain an account in detail of the debates and transactions of the convention. Instead, its only article relating to the subject reads: "We have the pleasure to announce to the public that on Wednesday last the convention of this State unanimously ratified the Federal Constitution in the words following," etc. The ratification bears all the names of the delegates above named, and also those of John Wereat, president and delegate for the county of Richmond, and Henry Osborne, James Seagrave, and Jacob Weed, of Camden County. The article in the Gazette closes with a statement that "as the last name was signed to the ratification a party of Colonel Armstrong's regiment, quartered in this town, proclaimed the joyful tidings opposite the statehouse by thirteen discharges of tw^o pieces of artillery."

In point of the time which elapsed between the receipt of instructions from Congress and the ratification of the Constitution by the State, Georgia should be ranked second, if not first, indeed, for her delegates signed their resolutions only twenty-four days after Delaware had signified her approval, whereas ver}^ nearly a month was required for the transmission of news from Philadelphia to Georgia. But when dates are compared it is found that the ratifications by Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey preceded that by Georgia; and when the States are listed according to the dates at which their notifications of approval reach the Congress, it is discovered that the news of ratification ])y two Eastern States had reached that bod}^ ])efore Georgia's communication was received,

Delaware, New Jersey, and Georgia are the only States whose conventions were unanimous in their approval of the instrument. The citizens of Georgia had no objections to a closer form of union among the several States. Their representatives had obtained practically all that they had seen lit to ask. Certainty of law and order between the States, guarantees of support against the Spanish and Indians in the possible emergency of war, non-interference in the realm of local affairs and in the matter of slavery and the slave trade, and full representation in the legislature of the General Government left nothing to be desired in the Constitution.

Georgia was insignificant among the States, but her ratification of the Federal Constitution was very important. When it became known to the northward that a State with such intense Southern spirit had ratified so quickly and without an amendment or a dissenting voice, a thrill of encouragement was felt ])y the workers for the cause throughout the States, while the hearts of many anti-Federalists failed them."

The Georgia State constitution, which was confessedly of a temporary character, had for some years been considered unsatisfactory. As soon as the activity of the State regarding the Federal Constitution came to an end, the matter of remodeling the State government was vigorously undertaken with the purpose of adapting it better to the Federal system. The general assembly on January 30, 1788, resolved to name three citizens from each county "to be convened after nine States have adopted the Federal Constitution, to take under their consideration the alterations and amendments that are necessary to be made in the constitution of this State." After receivingnews of the ratification of New Hampshire, the ninth State, Governor Handley called this convention to meet on November 4. It formulated a new constitution, which was published

aCf.,T. B. McMaster, History of the People of the United States, vol. 1, p. 476.

in the State. Another convention was elected by the people earl}' in December, with the function of offering amendments to the proposed document, and it met on January 4, 1789. By eTanuary 20 its work was finished and the second convention adjourned.

The instrument, as then offered for adoption and as tinally adopted, differed from the one which it superseded in being much more systematic, and in containing several conservative but important new features. It established a bicameral legislature, and heightened the qualiffcations for members of the assembly. It is an interesting detail of these qualiffcations that, while only two years' residence in Georgia was required of a member of the lower house, he must have been a citizen of the United States for seven years; and for the senate, a similar requirement of three and nine years was made. This is the earliest instance where any such discrimination was made in a State constitution, and is indicative of the national spirit which existed among the people of Georgia at that time.