[311] April 23, 1784. Journals, IX. 153.
[312] April 23, 1784. Journals, IX. 153.
[313] April 29, 1784. Journals, IX. 184.
[314] This proposition was introduced by Rufus King, March 16, 1785, and was committed by the votes of _eight_ States against _four_.
[315] April 19, 1785.
[316] May 20, 1785.
[317] September 14, 1786. Journals, XI. 221-223. The deed of cession, and the act of Connecticut recited in it, do not disclose this reservation. The territory ceded is described by certain lines which include less than the whole claim of Connecticut. It appears from the Journals, under the date of May 22-26, 1786, and from various propositions considered between those dates, that the State of Connecticut claimed to own a larger extent of territory than she proposed to cede; and by way of compromise, her claim was so far acceded to, that Congress agreed to accept of a cession of less than the whole.
The reservation embraced about six millions of acres. See Sparks"s Washington, IX. 178, note, where it appears that the right of the State to this territory was considered very feeble at the time.
[318] July 9, 1786.
[319] December 30, 1788.
[320] August 9, 1789.
[321] That of North Carolina was made February 25, 1790, and that of Georgia, April 24, 1802.
[322] See Mr. Madison"s notes of the Debates in the Confederation.
Elliot, V. 128, 157, 190, 211, 376, 381.
[323] His recommendation contemplated a survey of James River and the Potomac, from tide-water to their respective sources; then to ascertain the best portage between those rivers and the streams capable of improvement which run into the Ohio; then to traverse and survey those streams to their junction with the Ohio; then, pa.s.sing down the Ohio to the mouth of the Muskingum, to ascend that river to the carrying-place to the Cuyahoga; then down the Cuyahoga to Lake Erie, and thence to Detroit. He also advised a survey of Big Beaver Creek, and of the Scioto, and of all the waters east and west of the Ohio, which invited attention by their proximity and the ease of land transportation between them and the James and Potomac Rivers. "These things being done," he said, "I shall be mistaken if prejudice does not yield to facts, jealousy to candor, and finally, if reason and nature, thus aided, do not dictate what is right and proper to be done." (Writings of Washington, IX. 65.) This suggestion was adopted, and a commission appointed.
[324] Writings, IX. 63, 117-119. August 22, 1785.
[325] Article II. Journals, IX. 26.
[326] Executed November 30, 1782. Secret Journals, III. 338.
[327] Article VIII. Journals, IX. 29.
[328] June 25, 1784. Communicated to Congress November 19, 1784. Secret Journals, III. 517, 518.
[329] Guardoqui arrived and was recognized July 2, 1785. Secret Journals, III. 563.
[330] August 25, 1785. Secret Journals, III. 585, 586.
[331] See the communication made by Mr. Jay to Congress, August 3, 1786.
Secret Journals, IV. 43.
[332] Henry Lee, then in Congress, wrote to Washington on the 3d of July, 1786, as follows: "Your reasoning is perfectly conformable to the prevalent doctrine on that subject in Congress. We are very solicitous to form a treaty with Spain for commercial purposes. Indeed, no nation in Europe can give us conditions so advantageous to our trade as that kingdom. The carrying business they are like ourselves in, and this common source of difficulty in adjusting commercial treaties between other nations does not apply to America and Spain. But, my dear General, I do not think you go far enough. Rather than defer longer a free and liberal system of trade with Spain, why not agree to the exclusion of the Mississippi? This exclusion will not, cannot, exist longer than the infancy of the Western emigrants. Therefore, to these people what is now done cannot be important. To the Atlantic States it is highly important; for we have no prospect of bringing to a conclusion our negotiations with the court of Madrid, but by yielding the navigation of the Mississippi. Their Minister here is under positive instructions on that point. In all other arrangements, the Spanish monarch will give to the States testimonies of his regard and friendship. And I verily believe, that, if the above difficulty should be removed, we should soon experience the advantages which would flow from a connection with Spain." (Writings of Washington, IX. 173, note.)
[333] Washington"s Writings, IX. 205, 206, note.
[334] Washington had not changed his opinion, at the time of these negotiations. On the 18th of June, 1786, he wrote to Henry Lee, in answer to his letter above quoted: "The advantages with which the inland navigation of the rivers Potomac and James is pregnant, must strike every mind that reasons upon the subject; but there is, I perceive, a diversity of sentiment respecting the benefits and consequences which may flow from the free and immediate use of the Mississippi. My opinion of this matter has been uniformly the same; and no light in which I have been able to consider the subject is likely to change it. It is, neither to relinquish nor to push our claim to this navigation, but in the mean while to open _all_ the communications which Nature has afforded between the Atlantic States and the Western territory, and to encourage the use of them to the utmost. In my judgment, it is matter of very serious concern to the well-being of the former to make it the interest of the latter to trade with them; without which, the ties of consanguinity, which are weakening every day, will soon be no bond, and we shall be no more, a few years hence, to the inhabitants of that country, than the British and Spaniards are at this day; not so much, indeed, because commercial connections, it is well known, lead to others, and united are difficult to be broken. These must take place with the Spaniards, if the navigation of the Mississippi is opened. Clear I am, that it would be for the interest of the Western settlers, as low down the Ohio as the Big Kenhawa, and back to the Lakes, to bring their produce through one of the channels I have named; but the way must be cleared, and made easy and obvious to them, or else the ease with which people glide down streams will give a different bias to their thinking and acting.
Whenever the new States become so populous and so extended to the westward as really to need it, there will be no power which can deprive them of the use of the Mississippi. Why, then, should we prematurely urge a matter which is displeasing, and may produce disagreeable consequences, if it is our interest to let it sleep? It may require some management to quiet the restless and impetuous spirits of Kentucky, of whose conduct I am more apprehensive in this business than I am of all the opposition that will be given by the Spaniards." (IX. 172, 173.)
On the 26th of July of the same year, he again wrote to the same gentleman, expressing the same opinions; and on the 31st of October, he said that these sentiments "are controverted by only one consideration of weight, and that is, the operation which the occlusion of the river may have on the minds of the Western settlers, who will not consider the subject in a relative point of view, or on a comprehensive scale, and may be influenced by the demagogues of the country to acts of extravagance and desperation, under the popular declamation, that their interests are sacrificed." In July, 1787, he retained the same views as to the true policy of the different sections of the country interested in this question, but admitted that, from the spirit manifested at the West, it had become a moot point to determine, when every circ.u.mstance was brought into view, what was best to be done. (IX. 172, 180, 205, 261.)
[335] See Mr. Jay"s reasoning, Secret Journals, IV. 53, 54.
[336] August 29, 1786. Secret Journals, IV. 109, 110. The States which voted to rescind these instructions were New Hampshire, Ma.s.sachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Maryland; Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia, voted not to rescind. Another resolution was carried on the following day (August 30), by the votes of seven States, instructing the Secretary to insist on the territorial limits or boundaries of the United States, as fixed in the Treaty with Great Britain, and not to form any treaty with the Spanish Minister, unless those boundaries were acknowledged and secured.
Ibid. 111-116.
[337] This agreement was made between the 29th of August, the date of the rescinding resolution, and the 6th of October, 1786. See Mr. Jay"s communication to Congress under the latter date, Secret Journals, IV.
297-301.
[338] This seizure was made on the 6th of June, 1786. Secret Journals, IV. 325.
[339] See the doc.u.ments laid before Congress, April 13, 1787. Secret Journals, IV. 315-328. On the 30th of January, 1787, Mr. Jefferson thus writes to Mr. Madison, from Paris: "If these transactions give me no uneasiness, I feel very differently at another piece of intelligence, to wit, the possibility that the navigation of the Mississippi may be abandoned to Spain. I never had any interest westward of the Alleghany; and I never will have any. But I have had great opportunities of knowing the character of the people who inhabit that country; and I will venture to say, that the act which abandons the navigation of the Mississippi is an act of separation between the Eastern and Western country. It is a relinquishment of five parts out of eight of the territory of the United States; an abandonment of the fairest subject for the payment of our public debts, and the chaining those debts on our own necks, _in perpetuam_. I have the utmost confidence in the honest intentions of those who concur in this measure; but I lament their want of acquaintance with the character and physical advantages of the people, who, right or wrong, will suppose their interests sacrificed on this occasion to the contrary interests of that part of the Confederacy in possession of present power. If they declare themselves a separate people, we are incapable of a single effort to retain them. Our citizens can never be induced, either as militia or as soldiers, to go there to cut the throats of their own brothers and sons, or rather, to be themselves the subjects instead of the perpetrators of the parricide.
Nor would that country quit the cost of being retained against the will of its inhabitants, could it be done. But it cannot be done. They are able already to rescue the navigation of the Mississippi out of the hands of Spain, and to add New Orleans to their own territory. They will be joined by the inhabitants of Louisiana. This will bring on a war between them and Spain; and that will produce the question with us, whether it will not be worth our while to become parties with them in the war, in order to reunite them with us, and thus correct our error.
And were I to permit my forebodings to go one step further, I should predict that the inhabitants of the United States would force their rulers to take the affirmative of that question. I wish I may be mistaken in all these opinions." (Jefferson, II. 87.)
[340] Secret Journals, IV. 311-313.
[341] February 28, 1787.
[342] Madison. Elliot"s Debates, V. 97.
[343] These instructions were adopted in November, 1786. Pitkin, II.
207. They were laid before Congress, April 19, 1787. Madison. Elliot"s Debates, V. 103.
[344] Henry Lee did not approve of this policy. See Washington"s Works, IX. 205, note.
[345] See Madison"s account of two interviews with Guardoqui, March 13 and 19, 1787. Elliot, V. 98, 100. At the first of these interviews, Guardoqui stated that he had had no conference with Mr. Jay since the previous October, and never expected to confer with him again.
[346] April 18, 1787. Madison. Elliot, V. 102. On the next day (April 19) the instructions of Virginia were laid before Congress, but a motion to refer them also to the Secretary was lost, Ma.s.sachusetts and New York voting against it, and Connecticut being divided. Ibid. When Mr. Jay"s report came under consideration, Mr. Gorham of Ma.s.sachusetts, according to Madison, avowed his opinion, that the shutting of the Mississippi would be advantageous to the Atlantic States, and wished to see it shut.
Ibid. 103.
[347] Article IX.
[348] Madison. Elliot, V. 104, 105.
[349] Ibid.
[350] September 16, 1788. Secret Journals, IV. 449-454.
CHAPTER VI.
1783-1787.
DECAY AND FAILURE OF THE CONFEDERATION.--PROGRESS OF OPINION.--STEPS WHICH LED TO THE CONVENTION OF 1787.--INFLUENCE AND EXERTIONS OF HAMILTON.--MEETING OF THE CONVENTION.