The Confederation and the Constitution 1776-1790 The example of changing a constitution by assembling the wise men of the State instead of assembling armies will be worth as rmuch to the world as the former examples we lad given then. Tuomas Jerrenson, 1789 (2 Ginoriean Rovelution was not a revolu- tion in the sense of a radical or total change It did not suddenly and violently overturn the entire Political and social framework, as later occurred inthe French and Russian Revolutions. What happened was accelerated evolution rather than outright revolution, During the conflict itself, people went on working and praying, marcying and playing. Many of them were not seriously disturbed by the actual fighting, and the ‘most isolated communities scarcely knew that a war was on, But at war's end, al Americans faced a great question; what would be done with the independence that had been so dearly won? 3A A Shaky Start Toward Union Prospects for erecting a lasting regime were far from bright. It is always difficult to set up a new government and doubly difficult to set up a new type of govern. ‘ment. Disruptive forces stalked the land. The depar- ture of some eighty thousand Loyalists left the new ship of state without conservative ballast, fostering sometimes unsound experimentation and innovation. Patriots had fought the war with a high degree of di unity, but they had at least concurred on allegiance to 4 common cause. Now even that was gone. It would, have been almost a miracle if any government fash- ioned in all this confusion had long endured. Hard times, the bane of all regimes, set in shortly after the war and hit bottom in 1786. As if other trou- bles were not enough, British manufacturers, with dammed-up surpluses, began flooding the American, 160 market with cut-rate goods. Wae-baby American indus- trles, In particular, suffered industrial colic from such ruthless competition. One Philadelphia newspaper in 1783 urged readers to don home-stitched garments of homespun cloth: Of foreign gewsaws tet’ be free, Andi wear the webs of liberty. Yet hopeful signs could be discerned, The thir teen sovereign states were basically alike in gov- ermental structure and functioned under similar constitutions. Americans enjoyed a rich polit- ical inheritance, derived partly from Britain and partly from their own homegrown devices for self- government. Finally, they were blessed with political leaders of a high order in men like George Washing- ton, James Madison, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Alexander Hamilton. Ultimately, this formative moment, while more evolution than revolution, did usher in some striking changes—changes in social structures and customs, economic practices, and political institutions—as well as ideas about race, class, and gender. >f Constitution Making in the States The Continental Congress in 1776 called upon the colonies to draft new constitutions. In effect, the Continental Congress was actually asking the colo- nies to summon themselves into being as new states. ‘The sovereignty of these new states, according to the theory of republicanism, would rest on the authority.of the people. For a time the manufacture of govern- ments Was even more pressing than the manufacture of gunpowder. Although the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island merely retouched their colonial charters, constitution writers elsewhere worked tirelessly to cap- ture on black-inked parchment the republican spirit of the age Massachusetts contributed one especially notewor- thy innovation when it called a special convention to draft its constitution and then submitted the final draft directly to the people for ratification. Once adopted in 1780, the Massachusetts constitution could be changed only by another specially called constitutional conven- tion. This procedure was later imitated in the drafting and ratification of the federal Constitution. Adopted almost a decade before the federal Constitution, the Massachusetts constitution remains the longest-lived constitution in the world. The newly penned state constitutions had many features in common. Their similarity, as it turned out, made easier the drafting of a workable federal char- ter when the time was ripe. In the British tradition, a “constitution” was not a written document, but rather an accumulation of laws, customs, and precedents Americans invented something different. The docu- ments they drafted were contracts that defined the powers of government, as did the old colonial charters, but they drew their authority from the people, not from the royal seal of a distant king. As written documents the state constitutions were intended to represent a firndamental law, superior to the transient whims of ordinary legislation. Most of these documents included bills of rights, specifically guaranteeing long- prized liberties against later legislative encroachment. Most of them required the annual election of legisla- tors, who were thus forced to stay in touch with the mood of the people. All of them deliberately created ‘weak executive and judicial branches, at least by pres- ent-day standards. A generation of quarreling with His Majesty's officials had implanted a deep distrust of despotic governors and arbitrary judges, In all the new state governments, the legislatures, as presumably the most democratic branch of govern- ment, were given sweeping powers. But as Thomas Jefferson warned, “173 despots [in a legislature] would surely be as oppressive as one.” Many Americans soon ‘came to agree with him. The democratic character of the new state legis- latures was vividly reflected by the presence of many members from the recently enfranchised poorer west- ern districts. Their influence was powerfully felt in their several successful movements to relocate state capitals from the haughty eastern seaports into the less pretentious interior. In the Revolutionary era, the capitals of New Hampshire, New York, Virginia, Aftermath ofthe Revolution + 161 North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia were all moved westward. These geographical shifts por- tended political shifts that deeply discomfited many more conservative Americans, Af Economic Crosscurrents Economic changes begotten by the war were likewise noteworthy, but not overwhelming, States seized con- trol of former crown lands, and although rich specula- tors had their day, many of the large Loyalist holdings were confiscated and eventually cut up into small farms. Roger Morris's huge estate in New York, for example, Was sliced into 250 parcels—thus accelerat- ing the spread of economic democracy. The frightful excesses of the French Revolution were avoided, partly because cheap land was easily available and because America had so few deeply entrenched landed aris- tocrats to be overthrown, It is highly significant that in the United States, economic democracy, broadly speaking, preceded political democracy. A sharp stimulus was given to manufacturing by the prewar nonimportation agreements and later by the war itself. Goods that had formerly been imported from Britain were mostly cut off, and the ingenious Yankees were forced to make their own. Ten years after the Revolution, busy Brandywine Creek, south of Philadelphia, was turning the water wheels of numerous mills along an eight-mile stretch. Yet America remained overwhelmingly @ nation of soiltillers, Economically speaking, independence had draw- backs. Much of the coveted commerce of Britain was still reserved for the loyal parts of the empire. American ships were now barred from British and British West Indies harbors. Fisheries were disrupted, and bounties for ships’ stores had abruptly ended. In some respects the hated British Navigation Laws were more disagreeable after independence than before. New commercial outlets, fortunately, compen- sated partially for the loss of old ones. Americans could now trade freely with foreign nations, subject {0 local restrictions—a boon they had not enjoyed in the days of mercantilism. Enterprising Yankee ship- pers ventured boldly—and profitably—into the Baltic and China Seas. In 1784 the Empress of China, carrying a valuable weed (ginseng) that was highly prized by Chinese herb doctors as a cure for impotence, led the ‘way into the East Asian markets Yet the general economic picture was far from rosy. War had spawned demoralizing extravagance, speculation, and. profiteering, with profits for some as indecently high as 300 percent. State governments1 Dor paning ers oey Jn Singleton Copley (1738-1815) “= / documents physical ikenesses,cloth- ing tyes, and other material posses sions typical ofan era. Butitcando more than that. Inthe execution ofthe panting its the preeminent portrait Painter ofcolonial America revealed important values ofhis time. Copley ‘composition and use of light empha: sized the importance of the mother inthe family. Ms. Copley isthe visual Center of the painting: the light falls predominantly on her, and she pro- vides the focus of activity fr the family ‘group. Although Copley had moved to England in 174 to avoid the disruptions (of war, he had made radical friends in Pa Uma Lee Copley Family Portrait, ca. 1776-1777 bhishometown of Boston and surely had imbibed the sentiment ofthe age about “republican motherhood'—a sentiment that revered women as homemakers ‘and mothers, the cultivators of good republican valuesin young citizen. What other prevailing attitudes, about gender and age, for example, might this painting reveal? had borrowed more during the war than they could ever hope to repay. Runaway Inflation had been ruin- ous to many citizens, and Congress had failed in its feeble attempts to curb economic laws. The average citizen was probably worse off financially at the end of the shooting than at the start. ‘The whole economic and social atmosphere was unhealthy. A newly rich class of profiteers was nols- ily conspicuous, whereas many once-wealthy people were left destitute. The controversy leading to the Revolutionary War had bred a keen distaste for taxes and encouraged disrespect for the majesty of the law 182 generally. John Adams had been shocked when glee- fully told by a horse-jockey neighbor that the courts of justice were all closed—a plight that proved to be only temporary. AK Creating a Confederation The Second Continental Congress of Revolutionary days was little more than a conference of ambassadors from the thirteen states. It was totally without con- stitutional authority and in general did only what it‘Western Merchants Negotiating for Tea in Hong Kong, ca. 1800 Yankee merchants and shippers figured prominently in the booming trade with China in the late eighteenth century. Among the "American entrepreneurs who prospered in the China trade was Warren Delano, ancestor of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. dared to do, though it asserted some control over mili- tary affairs and foreign policy. In nearly all respects, the thirteen states were sovereign, for they coined money, raised armies and navies, and erected tariff barriers. The legislature of Virginia even ratified sepa- rately the treaty of alliance of 1778 with France. Shortly before declaring independence in 1776, Congress appointed a committee to draft a written constitution for the new nation. The finished prod- uct was the Articles of Confederation. Adopted by Congress in 1777, it was translated into French after the Battle of Saratoga so as to convince France that America had @ genuine government in the mak- ing, The Articles were not ratified by all thirteen states until 1781, less than eight months before the victory. at Yorktown. The chief apple of discord was western lands. Six of the jealous states, including Pennsylvania and Maryland, had no holdings beyond the Allegheny Mountains. Seven, notably New York and Virginia, were favored with enormous acreage, in most cases (on the basis of earlier charter grants, The six land- hungry states argued that the more fortunate states ‘would not have retained possession of this splendid all the other states had not fought for it also, ‘A major complaint was that the land-rich states could sell their trans-Allegheny tracts and thus pay off pen- sions and other debts incurred in the common cause. States without such holdings would have to tax themselves heavily to defray these obligations. Why not turn the whole western area over to the central government? Unanimous approval of the Articles of Con- federation by the thirteen states was required, and land-starved Maryland stubbornly held out until March 1, 1781. Maryland at Tength gave in when New York surrendered its western claims and Virginia seemed about to do so. To sweeten the pill, Congress pledged itself to dispose of these vast areas for the “common benefit.” It further agreed to carve from the new public domain not colonies, but a number of “republican” states, which in time would be admitted to the Union on terms of com plete equality with all the others. This extraordinary commitment faithfully reflected the anticolonial spirit of the Revolution, and the pledge was later fully redeemed in the famed Northwest Ordinance of 1787 (see Map 9.) Fertile public lands thus transferred to the central government proved to be an invaluable bond of union. 1664+ CHAPTERS The Confederation and the Constitution, 1776-1790 (MAP 9.1 Western Land Cessions to the United States, 1782-1802 2000 ers ‘The states that had thrown their heritage into the com- mon pot had to remain in the Union if they were to reap their share of the advantages from the land sales, An army of westward-moving pioneers purchased their farms from the federal government, directly or indirectly, and they learned to look to the national, ‘capital, rather than to the state capitals—with a conse- quent weakening of local influence. Finally, a uniform national land policy was made possible. Af The Articles of Confederation: America’s First Constitution The Articles of Confederation—some have said “Articles of Confusion'—provided for a loose confederation or m league of friendship.” Thirteen independent states were thus linked together for joint action in, dealing with common problems, such as foreign affairs. A clumsy Congress was to be the chief agency of government. There was no executive branch— George III had left @ bad taste—and the vital judicial arm was left almost exclusively to the states. Gult of Mexico ATLANTIC OCEAN se yf iy cre yon to 782 Toy es GaSe iy ceded yyy, oa [ote cis alten ste WBirerceson 2b, —Seeewtoutn ons ‘Congress, though dominant, was severely hobbled. Each state had a single vote, so that some sixty-eight thousand Rhode Islanders had the same voice as more than ten times that many Virginians. All bills deal- ing with subjects of importance required the support of nine states; any amendment of the Articles them- selves required unanimous ratification. Unanimity was almost impossible, and this meant that the amend- ing process, perhaps fortunately, was unworkable. If it had been workable, the Republic might have struggled along with @ patched-up Articles of Confederation rather than replace it with an effective Constitution. The shackled Congress was weak—and was pure Posely designed to be weak. Suspicious states, having just won control over taxation and commerce from Britain, hhad no desire to yield their newly acquired privileges to an American partiament—even one of their own making ‘Two handicaps of Congress were crippling. It had no power to regulate commerce, and this loophole left the states free to establish different, and often conflicting, laws egarding tariffs and navigation. Nor could Congress enforce its tax-collection program. It established a tax quota for each of the states and then asked them pleaseACtippled Confederation» 165 hiladelphia, 1776 Originally builtin the 1730s as a meeting place for the Pennsylvania colonial assembly, this building witnessed much history: here Washington was given command of the Continental Army, the Declaration of Independence was signed, and the Constitution was hammered out. The building began to be called “independence Hall" in the 1820s and is today a major tourist destination in Philadelphia, to contribute their share on a voluntary basis. The central authority—a “government by supplication’—was lucky if in any year it received one-fourth ofits requests. ‘The feeble national government in Philadelphia could advise and advocate and appeal. But in dealing with the independent states, it could not command, Or coerce or control. It could not act directly upon the individual citizens of a sovereign state; it could not even, protect itself against gross indignities. In 1783 a group of mutinous Pennsylvania soldiers, whose pay was in arrears, marched to Philadelphia and made a threaten- ing demonstration in front of Independence Hall. After Congress appealed in vain to the state for protection, its members fled to safety at Princeton College in New Jersey. The new Congress, with all its paper powers, was ‘even less effective than the old Continental Congress, which had wielded no constitutional powers at all. Yet the Articles of Confederation, weak though they were, proved to be a landmark in government. ‘They were for those days a model of what a loose con- federation could be, Thomas Jefferson enthusiastically hailed the new structure as the best one “existing or that ever did exist.” To compare it with the European governments, he thought, was like comparing “heaven and hell.” But although the Confederation was praise- worthy as confederations went, the troubled times demanded not a loosely woven confederation but a tightly Knit federation. This involved the yielding by the states of their sovereignty to a completely recast federal government, which in turn would leave them, free to control their local affairs. In spite of their defects, the anemic Articles of Confederation were a significant stepping stone toward the present Constitution, They clearly out- lined the general powers that were to be exercised by the central government, such as making treaties and establishing a postal service, As the first written con- stitution of the Republic, the Articles kept alive the flickering ideal of union and held the states together— until such time as they were ripe for the establishment of a strong constitution by peaceful, evolutionary ‘methods. Without this intermediary jump, the states probably would never have consented to the breath- taking leap from the old boycott Association of 1774 to the Constitution of the United States. # Landmarks in Land Laws Handcuffed though the Congress of the Confedera- tion was, it succeeded in passing supremely farsighted pieces of legislation. hese related to an immense part of the public domain recently acquired from the states and commonly known as the Old Northwest. This