|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
American History CHAPTER 4 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
| |
American History
Ch 1 | Ch 2 | Ch 3 | Ch 4 | Ch 5 | Ch 6 | Ch 7
Ch 8 | Ch 9 | Ch 10 | Ch 11 | Ch 12 | Ch 13 | Ch 14
CHAPTER 4: The Formation of a National Government
An Outline of American History
"Every man and every body of men on Earth, possess the right of self-government."
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1790
STATE CONSTITUTIONS
The success of the Revolution gave Americans the opportunity to give legal
form to their ideals as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, and to
remedy some of their grievances through state constitutions. As early as May
10, 1776, Congress had passed a resolution advising the colonies to form new
governments "such as shall best conduce to the happiness and safety of their
constituents." Some of them had already done so, and within a year after the
Declaration of Independence, all but three had drawn up constitutions.
The new constitutions showed the impact of democratic ideas. None made any
drastic break with the past, since all were built on the solid foundation of
colonial experience and English practice. But each was also animated by the
spirit of republicanism, an ideal that had long been praised by
Enlightenment philosophers.
Naturally, the first objective of the framers of the state constitutions was
to secure those "unalienable rights" whose violation had caused the former
colonies to repudiate their connection with Britain. Thus, each constitution
began with a declaration or bill of rights. Virginia's, which served as a
model for all the others, included a declaration of principles, such as
popular sovereignty, rotation in office, freedom of elections and an
enumeration of fundamental liberties: moderate bail and humane punishment,
speedy trial by jury, freedom of the press and of conscience, and the right
of the majority to reform or alter the government.
Other states enlarged the list of liberties to guarantee freedom of speech,
of assembly and of petition, and frequently included such provisions as the
right to bear arms, to a writ of habeas corpus, to inviolability of domicile
and to equal protection under the law. Moreover, all the constitutions paid
allegiance to the three-branch structure of government -- executive,
legislative and judiciary -- each checked and balanced by the others.
Pennsylvania's constitution was the most radical. In that state,
Philadelphia artisans, Scots-Irish frontiersmen and German-speaking farmers
had taken control. The provincial congress adopted a constitution that
permitted every male taxpayer and his sons to vote, required rotation in
office (no one could serve as a representative more than four years out of
every seven) and set up a single-chamber legislature.
The state constitutions had some glaring limitations, particularly by more
recent standards. Constitutions established to guarantee people their
natural rights did not secure for everyone the most fundamental natural
right -- equality. The colonies south of Pennsylvania excluded their slave
populations from their inalienable rights as human beings. Women had no
political rights. No state went so far as to permit universal male suffrage,
and even in those states that permitted all taxpayers to vote (Delaware,
North Carolina and Georgia, in addition to Pennsylvania), office-holders
were required to own a certain amount of property.
ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION
The struggle with England had done much to change colonial attitudes. Local
assemblies had rejected the Albany Plan of Union in 1754, refusing to
surrender even the smallest part of their autonomy to any other body, even
one they themselves had elected. But in the course of the Revolution, mutual
aid had proved effective, and the fear of relinquishing individual authority
had lessened to a large degree.
John Dickinson produced the "Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union"
in 1776. The Continental Congress adopted them in November 1777, and they
went into effect in 1781, having been ratified by all the states. The
governmental framework established by the Articles had many weaknesses. The
national government lacked the authority to set up tariffs when necessary,
to regulate commerce and to levy taxes. It lacked sole control of
international relations: a number of states had begun their own negotiations
with foreign countries. Nine states had organized their own armies, and
several had their own navies. There was a curious hodgepodge of coins and a
bewildering variety of state and national paper bills, all fast depreciating
in value.
Economic difficulties after the war prompted calls for change. The end of
the war had a severe effect on merchants who supplied the armies of both
sides and who had lost the advantages deriving from participation in the
British mercantile system. The states gave preference to American goods in
their tariff policies, but these tariffs were inconsistent, leading to the
demand for a stronger central government to implement a uniform policy.
Farmers probably suffered the most from economic difficulties following the
Revolution. The supply of farm produce exceeded demand, and unrest centered
chiefly among farmer-debtors who wanted strong remedies to avoid foreclosure
on their property and imprisonment for debt. Courts were clogged with suits
for debt. All through the summer of 1786, popular conventions and informal
gatherings in several states demanded reform in the state administrations.
In the autumn of 1786, mobs of farmers in Massachusetts under the leadership
of a former army captain, Daniel Shays, began forcibly to prevent the county
courts from sitting and passing further judgments for debt, pending the next
state election. In January 1787 a ragtag army of 1,200 farmers moved toward
the federal arsenal at Springfield. The rebels, armed chiefly with staves
and pitchforks, were repulsed by a small state militia force; General
Benjamin Lincoln then arrived with reinforcements from Boston and routed the
remaining Shaysites, whose leader escaped to Vermont. The government
captured 14 rebels and sentenced them to death, but ultimately pardoned some
and let the others off with short prison terms. After the defeat of the
rebellion, a newly elected legislature, whose majority sympathized with the
rebels, met some of their demands for debt relief.
THE PROBLEM OF EXPANSION
With the end of the Revolution, the United States again had to face the old
unsolved Western question -- the problem of expansion, with its
complications of land, fur trade, Indians, settlement and local government.
Lured by the richest land yet found in the country, pioneers poured over the
Appalachian Mountains and beyond. By 1775 the far-flung outposts scattered
along the waterways had tens of thousands of settlers. Separated by mountain
ranges and hundreds of kilometers from the centers of political authority in
the East, the inhabitants established their own governments. Settlers from
all the tidewater states pressed on into the fertile river valleys, hardwood
forests and rolling prairies of the interior. By 1790 the population of the
trans-Appalachian region numbered well over 120,000.
Before the war, several colonies had laid extensive and often overlapping
claims to land beyond the Appalachians. To those without such claims this
rich territorial prize seemed unfairly apportioned. Maryland, speaking for
the latter group, introduced a resolution that the western lands be
considered common property to be parceled by the Congress into free and
independent governments. This idea was not received enthusiastically.
Nonetheless, in 1780 New York led the way by ceding its claims to the United
States. In 1784 Virginia, which held the grandest claims, relinquished all
land north of the Ohio River. Other states ceded their claims, and it became
apparent that Congress would come into possession of all the lands north of
the Ohio River and west of the Allegheny Mountains. This common possession
of millions of hectares was the most tangible evidence yet of nationality
and unity, and gave a certain substance to the idea of national sovereignty.
At the same time, these vast territories were a problem that required
solution.
The Articles of Confederation offered an answer. Under the Articles, a
system of limited self-government (set forth in the Northwest Ordinance of
1787) provided for the organization of the Northwest Territory, initially as
a single district, ruled by a governor and judges appointed by the Congress.
When this territory had 5,000 free male inhabitants of voting age, it was to
be entitled to a legislature of two chambers, itself electing the lower
house. In addition, it could at that time send a non-voting delegate to
Congress.
No more than five nor fewer than three states were to be formed out of this
territory, and whenever any one of them had 60,000 free inhabitants, it was
to be admitted to the Union "on an equal footing with the original states in
all respects." The Ordinance guaranteed civil rights and liberties,
encouraged education and guaranteed that "there shall be neither slavery nor
involuntary servitude in the said territory."
The new policy repudiated the time-honored concept that colonies existed for
the benefit of the mother country and were politically subordinate and
socially inferior. That doctrine was replaced by the principle that colonies
are but the extension of the nation and are entitled, not as a privilege but
as a right, to all the benefits of equality. These enlightened provisions of
the Northwest Ordinance formed the basis for America's public land policy.
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION
George Washington wrote of the period between the Treaty of Paris and the
writing of the Constitution that the states were united only by a "rope of
sand."Disputes between Maryland and Virginia over navigation on the Potomac
River led to a conference of representatives of five states at Annapolis,
Maryland, in 1786. One of the delegates, Alexander Hamilton, convinced his
colleagues that commerce was too much bound up with other political and
economic questions, and that the situation was too serious to be dealt with
by so unrepresentative a body.
He advocated calling upon all the states to appoint representatives for a
meeting to be held the following spring in Philadelphia. The Continental
Congress was at first indignant over this bold step, but its protests were
cut short by the news that Virginia had elected George Washington a
delegate. During the next fall and winter, elections were held in all states
but Rhode Island.
It was a gathering of notables that assembled at the Federal Convention in
the Philadelphia State House in May 1787. The state legislatures sent
leaders with experience in colonial and state governments, in Congress, on
the bench and in the army. George Washington, regarded as the country's
outstanding citizen because of his integrity and his military leadership
during the Revolution, was chosen as presiding officer.
Prominent among the more active members were two Pennsylvanians: Gouverneur
Morris, who clearly saw the need for national government, and James Wilson,
who labored indefatigably for the national idea. Also elected by
Pennsylvania was Benjamin Franklin, nearing the end of an extraordinary
career of public service and scientific achievement. From Virginia came
James Madison, a practical young statesman, a thorough student of politics
and history and, according to a colleague, "from a spirit of industry and
application...the best-informed man on any point in debate." Madison today
is recognized as the "Father of the Constitution."
Massachusetts sent Rufus King and Elbridge Gerry, young men of ability and
experience. Roger Sherman, shoemaker turned judge, was one of the
representatives from Connecticut. From New York came Alexander Hamilton, who
had proposed the meeting. Absent from the Convention were Thomas Jefferson,
who was serving in France as minister, and John Adams, serving in the same
capacity in Great Britain. Youth predominated among the 55 delegates -- the
average age was 42.
The Convention had been authorized merely to draft amendments to the
Articles of Confederation but, as Madison later wrote, the delegates, "with
a manly confidence in their country," simply threw the Articles aside and
went ahead with the building of a wholly new form of government.
They recognized that the paramount need was to reconcile two different
powers -- the power of local control, which was already being exercised by
the 13 semi-independent states, and the power of a central government. They
adopted the principle that the functions and powers of the national
government, being new, general and inclusive, had to be carefully defined
and stated, while all other functions and powers were to be understood as
belonging to the states. But realizing that the central government had to
have real power, the delegates also generally accepted the fact that the
government should be authorized -- among other things -- to coin money, to
regulate commerce, to declare war and to make peace.
DEBATE AND COMPROMISE
The 18th-century statesmen who met in Philadelphia were adherents of
Montesquieu's concept of the balance of power in politics. This principle
was supported by colonial experience and strengthened by the writings of
John Locke, with which most of the delegates were familiar. These influences
led to the conviction that three equal and coordinate branches of government
should be established. Legislative, executive and judicial powers were to be
so harmoniously balanced that no one could ever gain control. The delegates
agreed that the legislative branch, like the colonial legislatures and the
British Parliament, should consist of two houses.
On these points there was unanimity within the assembly. But sharp
differences arose as to the method of achieving them. Representatives of the
small states -- New Jersey, for instance -- objected to changes that would
reduce their influence in the national government by basing representation
upon population rather than upon statehood, as was the case under the
Articles of Confederation.
On the other hand, representatives of large states, like Virginia, argued
for proportionate representation. This debate threatened to go on endlessly
until Roger Sherman came forward with arguments for representation in
proportion to the population of the states in one house of Congress, the
House of Representatives, and equal representation in the other, the Senate.
The alignment of large against small states then dissolved. But almost every
succeeding question raised new problems, to be resolved only by new
compromises. Northerners wanted slaves counted when determining each state's
tax share, but not in determining the number of seats a state would have in
the House of Representatives. According to a compromise reached with little
dissent, the House of Representatives would be apportioned according to the
number of free inhabitants plus three-fifths of the slaves.
Certain members, such as Sherman and Elbridge Gerry, still smarting from the
Shays Rebellion, feared that the mass of people lacked sufficient wisdom to
govern themselves and thus wished no branch of the federal government to be
elected directly by the people. Others thought the national government
should be given as broad a popular base as possible. Some delegates wished
to exclude the growing West from the opportunity of statehood; others
championed the equality principle established in the Northwest Ordinance of
1787.
There was no serious difference on such national economic questions as paper
money, laws concerning contract obligations or the role of women, who were
excluded from politics. But there was a need for balancing sectional
economic interests; for settling arguments as to the powers, term and
selection of the chief executive; and for solving problems involving the
tenure of judges and the kind of courts to be established.
Laboring through a hot Philadelphia summer, the Convention finally achieved
a draft incorporating in a brief document the organization of the most
complex government yet devised -- a government supreme within a clearly
defined and limited sphere. In conferring powers, the Convention gave the
federal government full power to levy taxes, borrow money, establish uniform
duties and excise taxes, coin money, fix weights and measures, grant patents
and copyrights, set up post offices, and build post roads. The national
government also had the power to raise and maintain an army and navy, and to
regulate interstate commerce. It was given the management of Indian affairs,
foreign policy and war. It could pass laws for naturalizing foreigners and
controlling public lands, and it could admit new states on a basis of
absolute equality with the old. The power to pass all necessary and proper
laws for executing these clearly defined powers rendered the federal
government able to meet the needs of later generations and of a greatly
expanded body politic.
The principle of separation of powers had already been given a fair trial in
most state constitutions and had proved sound. Accordingly, the Convention
set up a governmental system with separate legislative, executive and
judiciary branches -- each checked by the others. Thus congressional
enactments were not to become law until approved by the president. And the
president was to submit the most important of his appointments and all his
treaties to the Senate for confirmation. The president, in turn, could be
impeached and removed by Congress. The judiciary was to hear all cases
arising under federal laws and the Constitution; in effect, the courts were
empowered to interpret both the fundamental and the statute law. But members
of the judiciary, appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate,
could also be impeached by Congress.
To protect the Constitution from hasty alteration, Article V stipulated that
amendments to the Constitution be proposed either by two-thirds of both
houses of Congress or by two-thirds of the states, meeting in convention.
The proposals were to be ratified by one of two methods: either by the
legislatures of three-fourths of the states, or by convention in
three-fourths of the states, with the Congress proposing the method to be
used.
Finally, the Convention faced the most important problem of all: how should
the powers given to the new government be enforced? Under the Articles of
Confederation, the national government had possessed -- on paper --
significant powers, which, in practice, had come to naught, for the states
paid no attention to them. What was to save the new government from the same
fate?
At the outset, most delegates furnished a single answer -- the use of force.
But it was quickly seen that the application of force upon the states would
destroy the Union. The decision was that the government should not act upon
the states but upon the people within the states, and should legislate for
and upon all the individual residents of the country. As the keystone of the
Constitution, the Convention adopted two brief but highly significant
statements:
Congress shall have power...to make all laws which shall be necessary and
proper for carrying into execution the...powers vested by this Constitution
in the Government of the United States....
(Article I, Section 7)
This Constitution and the laws of the United States, which shall be made in
pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the
authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and
the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the
Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.(Article
VI)
Thus the laws of the United States became enforceable in its own national
courts, through its own judges and marshals, as well as in the state courts
through the state judges and state law officers.
Debate continues to this day about the motives of those who wrote the
Constitution. In 1913 Charles Beard, in An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution, argued that the Founding Fathers stood to gain economic
advantages from the stability imposed by a powerful and authoritative
national government because they held large amounts of depreciated
government securities. However, James Madison, principal drafter of the
constitution, held no bonds, while some opponents of the Constitution held
large amounts of bonds and securities. Economic interests influenced the
course of the debate, but so did state, sectional and ideological interests.
Equally important was the idealism of the framers. Products of the
Enlightenment, the Founding Fathers designed a government that, they
believed, would promote individual liberty and public virtue. The ideals
embodied in the U.S. Constitution are an essential element of the American
national identity.
RATIFICATION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS
On September 17, 1787, after 16 weeks of deliberation, the finished
Constitution was signed by 39 of the 42 delegates present. Franklin,
pointing to the half-sun painted in brilliant gold on the back of
Washington's chair, said:
I have often in the course of the session...looked at that [chair] behind
the president, without being able to tell whether it was rising or setting;
but now, at length, I have the happiness to know that it is a rising, and
not a setting, sun.
The Convention was over; the members "adjourned to the City Tavern, dined
together, and took a cordial leave of each other." Yet a crucial part of the
struggle for a more perfect union was yet to be faced. The consent of
popularly elected state conventions was still required before the document
could become effective.
The Convention had decided that the Constitution would take effect upon
ratification by conventions in nine of the 13 states. By June 1788 the
required nine states ratified the Constitution, but the large states of
Virginia and New York had not. Most people felt that without the support of
these two states, the Constitution would never be honored. To many, the
document seemed full of dangers: would not the strong central government
that it established tyrannize them, oppress them with heavy taxes and drag
them into wars?
Differing views on these questions brought into existence two parties, the
Federalists, who favored a strong central government, and the
Antifederalists, who preferred a loose association of separate states.
Impassioned arguments on both sides were voiced by the press, the
legislatures and the state conventions.
In Virginia, the Antifederalists attacked the proposed new government by
challenging the opening phrase of the Constitution: "We the People of the
United States." Without using the individual state names in the
Constitution, the delegates argued, the states would not retain their
separate rights or powers. Virginia Antifederalists were led by Patrick
Henry, who became the chief spokesman for back-country farmers who feared
the powers of the new central government. Wavering delegates were persuaded
by a proposal that the Virginia convention recommend a bill of rights, and
Antifederalists joined with the Federalists to ratify the Constitution on June 25.
In New York, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison pushed for the
ratification of the Constitution in a series of essays known as The
Federalist Papers. The essays, published in New York newspapers, provided a
now-classic argument for a central federal government, with separate
executive, legislative and judicial branches that checked and balanced one
another. With The Federalist Papers influencing the New York delegates, the
Constitution was ratified on July 26.
Antipathy toward a strong central government was only one concern among
those opposed to the Constitution; of equal concern to many was the fear
that the Constitution did not protect individual rights and freedoms
sufficiently. Virginian George Mason, author of Virginia's 1776 Declaration
of Rights, was one of three delegates to the Constitutional Convention who
refused to sign the final document because it did not enumerate individual
rights. Together with Patrick Henry, he campaigned vigorously against
ratification of the Constitution by Virginia. Indeed, five states, including
Massachusetts, ratified the Constitution on the condition that such
amendments be added immediately.
When the first Congress convened in New York City in September 1789, the
calls for amendments protecting individual rights were virtually unanimous.
Congress quickly adopted 12 such amendments; by December 1791, enough states
had ratified 10 amendments to make them part of the Constitution.
Collectively, they are known as the Bill of Rights. Among their provisions:
freedom of speech, press, religion, and the right to assemble peacefully,
protest and demand changes (First Amendment); protection against
unreasonable searches, seizures of property and arrest (Fourth Amendment);
due process of law in all criminal cases (Fifth Amendment); right to a fair
and speedy trial (Sixth Amendment); protection against cruel and unusual
punishment (Eighth Amendment); and provision that the people retain
additional rights not listed in the Constitution (Ninth Amendment).
Since the adoption of the Bill of Rights, only 16 more amendments have been
added to the Constitution. Although a number of the subsequent amendments
revised the federal government's structure and operations, most followed the
precedent established by the Bill of Rights and expanded individual rights
and freedoms.
PRESIDENT WASHINGTON
One of the last acts of the Congress of the Confederation was to arrange for
the first presidential election, setting March 4, 1789, as the date that the
new government would come into being. One name was on everyone's lips for
the new chief of state -- George Washington -- and he was unanimously chosen
president on April 30, 1789. In words spoken by every president since,
Washington pledged to execute the duties of the presidency faithfully and,
to the best of his ability, to "preserve, protect and defend the
Constitution of the United States."
When Washington took office, the new Constitution enjoyed neither tradition
nor the full backing of organized public opinion. Moreover, the new
government had to create its own machinery. No taxes were forthcoming. Until
a judiciary could be established, laws could not be enforced. The Army was
small. The Navy had ceased to exist.
Congress quickly created the departments of State and Treasury, with Thomas
Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton as their respective secretaries.
Simultaneously, the Congress established the federal judiciary, establishing
not only a Supreme Court, with one chief justice and five associate
justices, but also three circuit courts and 13 district courts. Both a
secretary of war and an attorney general were also appointed. And since
Washington generally preferred to make decisions only after consulting those
men whose judgment he valued, the American presidential Cabinet came into
existence, consisting of the heads of all the departments that Congress
might create.
Meanwhile, the country was growing steadily and immigration from Europe was
increasing. Americans were moving westward: New Englanders and
Pennsylvanians into Ohio; Virginians and Carolinians into Kentucky and
Tennessee. Good farms were to be had for small sums; labor was in strong
demand. The rich valley stretches of upper New York, Pennsylvania and
Virginia soon became great wheat-growing areas.
Although many items were still homemade, the Industrial Revolution was
dawning in America. Massachusetts and Rhode Island were laying the
foundation of important textile industries; Connecticut was beginning to
turn out tinware and clocks; New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania were
producing paper, glass and iron. Shipping had grown to such an extent that
on the seas the United States was second only to Britain. Even before 1790,
American ships were traveling to China to sell furs and bring back tea,
spices and silk.
At this critical juncture in the country's growth, Washington's wise
leadership was crucial. He organized a national government, developed
policies for settlement of territories previously held by Britain and Spain,
stabilized the northwestern frontier and oversaw the admission of three new
states: Vermont (1791), Kentucky (1792) and Tennessee (1796). Finally, in
his Farewell Address, Washington warned the nation to "steer clear of
permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world." This advice
influenced American attitudes toward the rest of the world for generations
to come.
HAMILTON VS. JEFFERSON
The conflict that took shape in the 1790s between the Federalists and the
Antifederalists exercised a profound impact on American history. The
Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, who had married into the wealthy
Schuyler family, represented the urban mercantile interests of the seaports;
the Antifederalists, led by Thomas Jefferson, spoke for the rural and
southern interests. The debate between the two concerned the power of the
central government versus that of the states, with the Federalists favoring
the former and the Antifederalists advocating states' rights.
Hamilton sought a strong central government acting in the interests of
commerce and industry. He brought to public life a love of efficiency, order
and organization. In response to the call of the House of Representatives
for a plan for the "adequate support of public credit," he laid down and
supported principles not only of the public economy, but of effective
government.
Hamilton pointed out that America must have credit for industrial
development, commercial activity and the operations of government. It must
also have the complete faith and support of the people. There were many who
wished to repudiate the national debt or pay only part of it. Hamilton,
however insisted upon full payment and also upon a plan by which the federal
government took over the unpaid debts of the states incurred during the
Revolution.
Hamilton also devised a Bank of the United States, with the right to
establish branches in different parts of the country. He sponsored a
national mint, and argued in favor of tariffs, using a version of an "infant
industry" argument: that temporary protection of new firms can help foster
the development of competitive national industries. These measures --
placing the credit of the federal government on a firm foundation and giving
it all the revenues it needed -- encouraged commerce and industry, and
created a solid phalanx of businessmen who stood firmly behind the national
government.
Jefferson advocated a decentralized agrarian republic. He recognized the
value of a strong central government in foreign relations, but he did not
want it strong in other respects. Hamilton's great aim was more efficient
organization, whereas Jefferson once said "I am not a friend to a very
energetic government." Hamilton feared anarchy and thought in terms of
order; Jefferson feared tyranny and thought in terms of freedom.
The United States needed both influences. It was the country's good fortune
that it had both men and could, in time, fuse and reconcile their
philosophies. One clash between them, which occurred shortly after Jefferson
took office as secretary of state, led to a new and profoundly important
interpretation of the Constitution. When Hamilton introduced his bill to
establish a national bank, Jefferson objected. Speaking for those who
believed in states' rights, Jefferson argued that the Constitution expressly
enumerates all the powers belonging to the federal government and reserves
all other powers to the states. Nowhere was it empowered to set up a bank.
Hamilton contended that because of the mass of necessary detail, a vast body
of powers had to be implied by general clauses, and one of these authorized
Congress to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper" for carrying
out other powers specifically granted. The Constitution authorized the
national government to levy and collect taxes, pay debts and borrow money. A
national bank would materially help in performing these functions
efficiently. Congress, therefore, was entitled, under its implied powers, to
create such a bank. Washington and the Congress accepted Hamilton's view --
and an important precedent for an expansive interpretation of the federal
government's authority.
CITIZEN GENET AND FOREIGN POLICY
Although one of the first tasks of the new government was to strengthen the
domestic economy and make the nation financially secure, the United States
could not ignore foreign affairs. The cornerstones of Washington's foreign
policy were to preserve peace, to give the country time to recover from its
wounds and to permit the slow work of national integration to continue.
Events in Europe threatened these goals. Many Americans were watching the
French Revolution with keen interest and sympathy, and in April 1793, news
came that made this conflict an issue in American politics. France had
declared war on Great Britain and Spain, and a new French envoy, Edmond
Charles Genet -- known as Citizen Genet -- was coming to the United States.
After the execution of King Louis XVI in January 1793, Britain, Spain and
Holland had become involved in war with France. According to the
Franco-American Treaty of Alliance of 1778, the United States and France
were perpetual allies, and America was obliged to help France defend the
West Indies. However, the United States, militarily and economically a very
weak country, was in no position to become involved in another war with
major European powers. On April 22, 1793, Washington effectively abrogated
the terms of the 1778 treaty that made American independence possible by
proclaiming the United States to be "friendly and impartial toward the
belligerent powers." When Genet arrived, he was cheered by many citizens,
but treated with cool formality by the government. Angered, he violated a
promise not to outfit a captured British ship as a privateer. Genet then
threatened to take his cause directly to the American people, over the head
of the government. Shortly afterward, the United States requested his recall
by the French government.
The Genet incident strained American relations with France at a time when
relations with Great Britain were far from satisfactory. British troops
still occupied forts in the West, property carried off by British soldiers
during the Revolution had not been restored or paid for, and the British
navy was seizing American ships bound for French ports. To settle these
matters, Washington sent John Jay, first chief justice of the Supreme Court,
to London as a special envoy, where he negotiated a treaty securing
withdrawal of British soldiers from western forts and London's promise to
pay damages for Britain's seizure of ships and cargoes in 1793 and 1794.
Reflecting the weakness of the U.S. position, the treaty placed severe
limitations on American trade with the West Indies and said nothing about
either the seizure of American ships in the future, or "impressment" -- the
forcing of American sailors into British naval service. Jay also accepted
the British view that naval stores and war materiel were contraband which
could not be conveyed to enemy ports by neutral ships.
Jay's Treaty touched off a stormy disagreement over foreign policy between
the Antifederalists, now called Republicans, and the Federalists. The
Federalists favored a pro-British policy because the commercial interests
they represented profited from trade with Britain. By contrast, the
Republicans favored France, in large measure for ideological reasons, and
regarded the Jay Treaty as too favorable to Britain. After long debate,
however, the Senate ratified the treaty.
ADAMS AND JEFFERSON
Washington retired in 1797, firmly declining to serve for more than eight
years as the nation's head. His vice president, John Adams of Massachusetts,
was elected the new president. Even before he entered the presidency, Adams
had quarreled with Alexander Hamilton -- and thus was handicapped by a
divided party.
These domestic difficulties were compounded by international complications:
France, angered by Jay's recent treaty with Britain, used the British
argument that food supplies, naval stores and war materiel bound for enemy
ports were subject to seizure by the French navy. By 1797 France had seized
300 American ships and had broken off diplomatic relations with the United
States. When Adams sent three other commissioners to Paris to negotiate,
agents of Foreign Minister Charles Maurice de Talleyrand (whom Adams labeled
X, Y and Z in his report to Congress) informed the Americans that
negotiations could only begin if the United States loaned France $12 million
and bribed officials of the French government. American hostility to France
rose to an excited pitch. The so-called XYZ Affair led to the enlistment of
troops and the strengthening of the fledgling U.S. Navy.
In 1799, after a series of sea battles with the French, war seemed
inevitable. In this crisis, Adams thrust aside the guidance of Hamilton, who
wanted war, and sent three new commissioners to France. Napoleon, who had
just come to power, received them cordially, and the danger of conflict
subsided with the negotiation of the Convention of 1800, which formally
released the United States from its 1778 defense alliance with France.
However, reflecting American weakness, France refused to pay $20 million in
compensation for American ships taken by the French navy.
Hostility to France led Congress to pass the Alien and Sedition Acts, which
had severe repercussions for American civil liberties. The Naturalization
Act, which changed the requirement for citizenship from five to 14 years,
was targeted at Irish and French immigrants suspected of supporting the
Republicans. The Alien Act, operative for two years only, gave the president
the power to expel or imprison aliens in time of war. The Sedition Act
proscribed writing, speaking or publishing anything of "a false, scandalous
and malicious" nature against the president or Congress. The few convictions
won under the Sedition Act only created martyrs to the cause of civil
liberties and aroused support for the Republicans.
The acts met with resistance. Jefferson and Madison sponsored the passage of
the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions by the legislatures of the two states
in November and December 1798. According to the resolutions, states could
"interpose" their views on federal actions and "nullify" them. The doctrine
of nullification would be used later for the Southern states' defense of
their interests vis-a-vis the North on the question of the tariff, and, more
ominously, slavery.
By 1800 the American people were ready for a change. Under Washington and
Adams, the Federalists had established a strong government, but sometimes
failing to honor the principle that the American government must be
responsive to the will of the people, they had followed policies that
alienated large groups. For example, in 1798 they had enacted a tax on
houses, land and slaves, affecting every property owner in the country.
Jefferson had steadily gathered behind him a great mass of small farmers,
shopkeepers and other workers, and they asserted themselves in the election
of 1800. Jefferson enjoyed extraordinary favor because of his appeal to
American idealism. In his inaugural address, the first such speech in the
new capital of Washington, D.C., he promised "a wise and frugal government"
to preserve order among the inhabitants but would "leave them otherwise free
to regulate their own pursuits of industry, and improvement."
Jefferson's mere presence in The White House encouraged democratic
procedures. He taught his subordinates to regard themselves merely as
trustees of the people. He encouraged agriculture and westward expansion.
Believing America to be a haven for the oppressed, he urged a liberal
naturalization law. By the end of his second term, his far-sighted secretary
of the treasury, Albert Gallatin, had reduced the national debt to less than
$560 million. As a wave of Jeffersonian fervor swept the nation, state after
state abolished property qualifications for the ballot and passed more
humane laws for debtors and criminals.
LOUISIANA AND BRITAIN
One of Jefferson's acts doubled the area of the country. At the end of the
Seven Years' War, France had ceded to Spain the territory west of the
Mississippi River, with the port of New Orleans near its mouth -- a port
indispensable for the shipment of American products from the Ohio and
Mississippi valleys. Shortly after Jefferson became president, Napoleon
forced a weak Spanish government to cede the great tract called Louisiana
back to France. The move filled Americans with apprehension and indignation.
Napoleon's plans for a huge colonial empire just west of the United States
threatened the trading rights and the safety of all American interior
settlements. Jefferson asserted that if France took possession of Louisiana,
"from that moment we must marry ourselves to the British fleet and nation."
Napoleon, knowing that another war with Great Britain was impending,
resolved to fill his treasury and put Louisiana beyond the reach of the
British by selling it to the United States. This put Jefferson in a
constitutional quandary: the Constitution gave no office the power to
purchase territory. At first Jefferson wanted to amend the Constitution, but
his advisers told him that delay might lead Napoleon to change his mind --
and that the power to purchase territory was inherent in the power to make
treaties. Jefferson relented, saying that "the good sense of our country
will correct the evil of loose construction when it shall produce ill
effects."
For $15 million, the United States obtained the "Louisiana Purchase" in
1803. It contained more than 2,600,000 square kilometers as well as the port
of New Orleans. The nation had gained a sweep of rich plains, mountains,
forests and river systems that within 80 years would become the nation's
heartland -- and one of the world's great granaries.
As Jefferson began his second term in 1805, he declared American neutrality
during the struggle between Great Britain and France. Although both sides
sought to restrict neutral shipping to the other, British control of the
seas made its interdiction and seizure much more serious than any actions by
Napoleonic France.
By 1807 the British had built their navy to more than 700 warships manned by
nearly 150,000 sailors and marines. The massive force controlled the sea
lanes: blockading French ports, protecting British commerce and maintaining
the crucial links to Britain's colonies. Yet the men of the British fleet
lived under such harsh conditions that it was impossible to obtain crews by
free enlistment. Many sailors deserted and found refuge on U.S. vessels. In
these circumstances, British officers regarded it as their right to search
American ships and take off British subjects, to the great humiliation of
the Americans. Moreover, British officers frequently impressed American
seamen into their service.
When Jefferson issued a proclamation ordering British warships to leave U.S.
territorial waters, the British reacted by impressing more sailors.
Jefferson decided to rely on economic pressure to force the British to back
down. In December 1807 Congress passed the Embargo Act, forbidding all
foreign commerce. Ironically, the Republicans, the champions of limited
government, had passed a law that vastly increased the powers of the
national government. In a single year American exports fell to one-fifth of
their former volume. Shipping interests were almost ruined by the measure,
and discontent rose in New England and New York. Agricultural interests
found that they too were suffering heavily, for prices dropped drastically
when the Southern and Western farmers could not export their surplus grain,
cotton, meat and tobacco.
The hope that the embargo would starve Great Britain into a change of policy
failed. As the grumbling at home increased, Jefferson turned to a milder
measure, which conciliated domestic shipping interests. In early 1809 he
signed the Non-Intercourse Act permitting commerce with all countries except
Britain or France and their dependencies.
James Madison succeeded Jefferson as president in 1809. Relations with Great
Britain grew worse, and the two countries moved rapidly toward war. The
president laid before Congress a detailed report, showing several thousand
instances in which the British had impressed American citizens. In addition,
northwestern settlers had suffered from attacks by Indians whom they
believed had been incited by British agents in Canada. This led many
Americans to favor conquest of Canada. Success in such an endeavor would
eliminate British influence among the Indians and open up new lands for
colonization. The desire to conquer Canada, coupled with deep resentment
over impressment of sailors, generated war fervor, and in 1812 the United
States declared war on Britain.
WAR OF 1812
As the country prepared for yet another war with Britain, the United States
suffered from internal divisions. While the South and West favored war, New
York and New England opposed it because it interfered with their commerce.
The declaration of war had been made with military preparations still far
from complete. There were fewer than 7,000 regular soldiers, distributed in
widely scattered posts along the coast, near the Canadian border and in the
remote interior. These soldiers were to be supported by the undisciplined
militia of the states.
Hostilities between the two countries began with an invasion of Canada,
which, if properly timed and executed, would have brought united action
against Montreal. But the entire campaign miscarried and ended with the
British occupation of Detroit. The U.S. Navy, however, scored successes and
restored confidence. In addition, American privateers, swarming the
Atlantic, captured 500 British vessels during the fall and winter months of
1812 and 1813.
The campaign of 1813 centered on Lake Erie. General William Henry Harrison
-- who would later become president -- led an army of militia, volunteers
and regulars from Kentucky with the object of reconquering Detroit. On
September 12, while he was still in upper Ohio, news reached him that
Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry had annihilated the British fleet on Lake
Erie. Harrison occupied Detroit and pushed into Canada, defeating the
fleeing British and their Indian allies on the Thames River. The entire
region now came under American control.
Another decisive turn in the war occurred a year later when Commodore Thomas
Macdonough won a point-blank gun duel with a British flotilla on Lake
Champlain in upper New York. Deprived of naval support, a British invasion
force of 10,000 men retreated to Canada. At about the same time, the British
fleet was harassing the Eastern seaboard with orders to "destroy and lay
waste." On the night of August 24, 1814, an expeditionary force burst into
Washington, D.C., home of the federal government, and left it in flames.
President James Madison fled to Virginia.
As the war continued, British and American negotiators each demanded
concessions from the other. The British envoys decided to concede, however,
when they learned of Macdonough's victory on Lake Champlain. Urged by the
Duke of Wellington to reach a settlement, and faced with the depletion of
the British treasury due in large part to the heavy costs of the Napoleonic
Wars, the negotiators for Great Britain accepted the Treaty of Ghent in
December 1814. It provided for the cessation of hostilities, the restoration
of conquests and a commission to settle boundary disputes. Unaware that a
peace treaty had been signed, the two sides continued fighting in New
Orleans, Louisiana. Led by General Andrew Jackson, the Americans scored the
greatest land victory of the war.
While the British and Americans were negotiating a settlement, Federalist
delegates selected by the legislatures of Massachusetts, Rhode Island,
Connecticut, Vermont and New Hampshire gathered in Hartford, Connecticut, in
a meeting that symbolized opposition to "Mr. Madison's war." New England had
managed to trade with the enemy throughout the conflict, and some areas
actually prospered from this commerce. Nevertheless, the Federalists claimed
that the war was ruining the economy. Some delegates to the convention
advocated secession from the Union, but the majority agreed on a series of
constitutional amendments to limit Republican influence, including
prohibiting embargoes lasting more than 60 days and forbidding successive
presidents from the same state. By the time messengers from the Hartford
Convention reached Washington, D.C., however, they found the war had ended.
The Hartford Convention stamped the Federalists with a stigma of disloyalty
from which they never recovered.
SIDEBAR: THE SECOND GREAT AWAKENING
By the end of the 18th century, many educated Americans no longer professed
traditional Christian beliefs. In reaction to the secularism of the age, a
religious revival spread westward in the first half of the 19th century.
This second great religious revival in American history consisted of several
kinds of activity, distinguished by locale and expression of religious
commitment. In New England, the renewed interest in religion inspired a wave
of social activism. In western New York, the spirit of revival encouraged
the emergence of new denominations. In the Appalachian region of Kentucky
and Tennessee, the revival strengthened the Methodists and the Baptists, and
spawned a new form of religious expression -- the camp meeting.
In contrast to the Great Awakening of the 1730s, the revivals in the East
were notable for the absence of hysteria and open emotion. Rather,
unbelievers were awed by the "respectful silence" of those bearing witness
to their faith.
The evangelical enthusiasm in New England gave rise to interdenominational
missionary societies, formed to evangelize the West. Members of these
societies not only acted as apostles for the faith, but as educators, civic
leaders and exponents of Eastern, urban culture. Publication and education
societies promoted Christian education; most notable among them was the
American Bible Society, founded in 1816. Social activism inspired by the
revival gave rise to abolition groups and the Society for the Promotion of
Temperance, as well as to efforts to reform prisons and care for the
handicapped and mentally ill.
The revival in western New York was largely the work of Charles Gradison
Finney, a lawyer from Adams, New York. The area from Lake Ontario to the
Adirondack Mountains had been the scene of so many religious revivals in the
past that it was known as the "Burned-Over District." In 1821 Finney
experienced something of a religious epiphany and set out to preach the
Gospel in western New York. His revivals were characterized by careful
planning, showmanship and advertising. Finney preached in the Burned-Over
District throughout the 1820s and the early 1830s, before moving to Ohio in
1835 to take a chair in theology at Oberlin College. He subsequently became
president of Oberlin.
Two other important religious denominations in America -- the Mormons and
the Seventh Day Adventists also got their start in the Burned-Over District.
In the Appalachian region, the revival took on characteristics similar to
the Great Awakening of the previous century. But here, the center of the
revival was the camp meeting -- defined as a "religious service of several
days' length, for a group that was obliged to take shelter on the spot
because of the distance from home." Pioneers in thinly populated areas
looked to the camp meeting as a refuge from the lonely life on the frontier.
The sheer exhilaration of participating in a religious revival with hundreds
and perhaps thousands of people inspired the dancing, shouting and singing
associated with these events.
The first camp meeting took place in July 1800 at Gasper River Church in
southwestern Kentucky. A much larger one was held at Cane Ridge, Kentucky,
in August 1801, where between 10,000 and 25,000 people attended, and
Presbyterian, Baptist and Methodist ministers participated. It was this
event that stamped the organized revival as the major mode of church
expansion for denominations such as the Methodists and Baptists.
The great revival quickly spread throughout Kentucky, Tennessee and southern
Ohio, with the Methodists and the Baptists its prime beneficiaries. Each
denomination had assets that allowed it to thrive on the frontier. The
Methodists had a very efficient organization that depended on ministers --
known as circuit riders -- who sought out people in remote frontier
locations. The circuit riders came from among the common people, which
helped them establish a rapport with the frontier families they hoped to
convert.
The Baptists had no formal church organization. Their farmer-preachers were
people who received "the call" from God, studied the Bible and founded a
church, which then ordained them. Other candidates for the ministry emerged
from these churches, and they helped the Baptist Church to establish a
presence farther into the wilderness. Using such methods, the Baptists
became dominant throughout the border states and most of the South.
The Second Great Awakening exercised a profound impact on American history.
The numerical strength of the Baptists and Methodists rose relative to that
of the denominations dominant in the colonial period -- the Anglicans,
Presbyterians and Congregationalists. Among the latter, efforts to apply
Christian teaching to the resolution of social problems presaged the Social
Gospel of the late 19th century. America was becoming a more diverse nation
in the early to mid-19th century, and the growing differences within
American Protestantism reflected and contributed to this diversity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The U. S. Constitution
