Section 7A of the History of the United States by Charles A. Beard and Mary Ritter Beard, Part 3, The Union and National Politics. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Kristi Nowak. History of the United States by Charles A. Beard and Mary Ritter Beard, Part 3, Section 7A. Chapter 7. The Formation of the Constitution. The Promise and the Difficulties of America. The rise of a young republic, composed of thirteen states, each governed by officials popularly elected under constitutions drafted by the plain people, was the most significant feature of the eighteenth century. The majority of the patriots whose labors and sacrifices had made this possible naturally looked upon their work and pronounced it good. Those Americans, however, who peered beneath the surface of things, saw that the Declaration of Independence, even if splendidly phrased, and paper constitutions drawn by finest enthusiasm uninstructed by experience, could not alone make the republic great and prosperous, or even free. All around them they saw chaos in finance and in industry and perils for the immediate future. The government, under the Articles of Confederation, had neither the strength nor the resources necessary to cope with the problems of reconstruction left by the war. The sole organ of government was a Congress, composed of from two to seven members from each state chosen as the legislature might direct and paid by the state. In determining all questions, each state had one vote. Delaware thus enjoyed the same weight as Virginia. There was no president to enforce the laws. The Congress was given power to select a committee of thirteen, one from each state, to act as an executive body when it was not in session. But this device, unbeing tried out, proved a failure. There was no system of national courts to which citizens and states could appeal for the protection of their rights or through which they could compel obedience to law. The two great powers of government, military and financial, were withheld. Congress, it is true, could authorize expenditures, but had to rely upon the states for the payment of contributions to meet its bills. It could also order the establishment of an army, but it could only request the states to supply their respective quotas of soldiers. It could not lay taxes, nor bring any pressure to bear upon a single citizen in the whole country. It could act only through the medium of the state governments. Financial and commercial disorders. In the field of public finance, the disorders were pronounced. The huge debt incurred during the war was still outstanding. Congress was unable to pay either the interest or the principal. Public creditors were in despair as the market value of their bonds sank to twenty-five or even ten cents on the dollar. The current bills of Congress were unpaid. As someone complained, there was not enough money in the treasury to buy pen and ink with which to record the transactions of the shadow legislature. The currency was in utter chaos. Millions of dollars in notes issued by Congress had become mere trash worth a cent or two on the dollar. There was no other expression of contempt so forceful as the popular saying, not worth a continental. To make matters worse, several of the states were pouring new streams of paper money from the press. Almost the only good money in circulation consisted of English, French and Spanish coins, and the public was even defrauded by them because money-changers were busy clipping and filing away the metal. Foreign commerce was unsettled. The entire British system of trade discrimination was turned against the Americans and Congress, having no power to regulate foreign commerce, was unable to retaliate or to negotiate treaties which it could enforce. Domestic commerce was impeded by the jealousies of the states which erected tariff barriers against their neighbors. The condition of the currency made the exchange of money and goods extremely difficult and, as if to increase the confusion, backward states enacted laws hindering the prompt collection of debts within their borders, an evil which nothing but a national system of courts could cure. Congress in Disrepute With treaties set at naught by the states, the laws unenforced, the Treasury empty, and the public credit gone, the Congress of the United States fell into utter disrepute. It called upon the states to pay their quotas of money into the Treasury only to be treated with contempt. Even its own members looked upon it as a solemn futility. Some of the ablest men refused to accept election to it, and many who did take the doubtful honor failed to attend the sessions. Again and again it was impossible to secure a quorum for the transaction of business. Troubles of the State Governments The state governments, free to pursue their own course with no interference from without, had almost as many difficulties as the Congress. They were too loaded with revolutionary debts calling for heavy taxes upon an already restive population, oppressed by their financial burdens and discouraged by the fall in prices which followed the return of peace. The farmers of several states joined in a concerted effort and compelled their legislatures to issue large sums of paper money. The currency fell in value, but nevertheless it was forced on unwilling creditors to square old accounts. In every part of the country legislative action fluctuated violently. Laws were made one year only to be repealed the next and reenacted the third year. Lands were sold by one legislature and the sales were canceled by its successor. Uncertainty and distrust were the natural consequences. Men of substance longed for some power that would forbid states to issue bills of credit to make paper money legal tender in payment of debts or to impair the obligation of contracts. Men heavily in debt, on the other hand, urged even more drastic action against creditors. So great did the discontent of the farmers in New Hampshire become in 1786 when the mob surrounded the legislature demanding a repeal of the taxes and the issuance of paper money. It was with difficulty that an armed rebellion was avoided. In Massachusetts, the malcontents under the leadership of Daniel Shays, a captain in the Revolutionary Army, organized that same year open resistance to the government of the state. Shays and his followers protested against the conduct of creditors in foreclosing mortgages upon the debt burdened farmers against the lawyers for increasing the cost of legal proceedings, against the Senate of the state, the members of which were apportioned among the towns on the basis of the amount of taxes paid against heavy taxes and against the refusal of the legislature to issue paper money. They seized the town of Worcester and Springfield and broke up the courts of justice. All through the western part of the state, the revolt spread, sending a shock of alarm to every center and section of the young republic. Only by the most vigorous action was Governor Bowdoin able to quell the uprising and when that task was accomplished, the state government did not dare to execute any of the prisoners because they had so many sympathizers. Moreover, Bowdoin and several members of the legislature who had been most zealous in their attacks on the insurgents were defeated at the ensuing election. The need of national assistance for state governments in times of domestic violence was everywhere emphasized by men who were opposed to revolutionary acts. Alarm over dangers to the republic. Leading American citizens, watching the drift of affairs were slowly driven to the conclusion that the new ship of state so proudly launched a few years before was careening into anarchy. The facts of our peace and independence, wrote a friend of Washington, do not at present wear so promising an appearance as I had fondly painted in my mind, the prejudices, jealousies and turbulence of the people at times almost stagger my confidence in our political establishments and almost occasion me to think that they will show themselves worthy of the noble prize for which we have contended. Washington himself was profoundly discouraged. On hearing of Shea's rebellion he exclaimed, What gracious God is man that there should be such inconsistency and perfidiousness in his conduct. It is but the other day that we were shedding our blood to obtain the constitutions under which we now live, constitutions of our own choice and making, and now we are unsheathing our sword to overturn them. The same year he burst out in a lament of rumors of restoring royal government. I am told that even respectable characters speak of a monarchical government without horror from thinking precedes speaking. Hence to acting is often but a single step. But how irresistible and tremendous, what a triumph for our enemies to verify their predictions. What a triumph for the advocates of despotism to find that we are incapable of governing ourselves. Congress attempts some reforms. The Congress was not indifferent to the events that disturbed Washington. On the contrary, it put forth many efforts to check tendencies so dangerous to finance commerce, industries, and the confederation itself. In 1781, even before the Treaty of Peace was signed, the Congress, having found out how futile were its taxing powers, carried a resolution of amendment to the Articles of Confederation, authorizing the levy of a moderate duty on imports. Yet this mild measure was rejected by the states. Two years later, the Congress prepared another amendment sanctioning the levy of duties on imports to be collected this time by state officers and applied to the payment of the public debt. This more limited proposal, designed to save public credit, likewise failed. In 1786, the Congress made a third appeal to the states for help, declaring that they had been so irregular and so negligent in paying their quotas that further reliance upon that mode of raising revenues was dishonorable and dangerous. The Calling of a Constitutional Convention Hamilton and Washington Urge Reform The attempts at reform by the Congress were accompanied by demand for, both within and without that body, a convention to frame a new plan of government. In 1780, the youthful Alexander Hamilton, realizing the weakness of the articles so widely discussed, proposed a general convention for the purpose of drafting a new constitution on entirely different principles. With tireless energy he strove to bring his countrymen to his view. Washington, agreeing with him on every point, declared in a circular letter to the governors that the duration of the union would be short unless there was lodged somewhere a supreme power to regulate and govern the general concerns of the Confederated Republic. The governor of Massachusetts, disturbed by the growth of discontent all about him, suggested to the state legislature in 1785 the advisability of a national convention to enlarge the powers of Congress. The legislature approved the plan, but did not press it to a conclusion. The Annapolis Convention Action finally came from the South. The Virginia legislature, taking things into its own hands, called a conference of delegates at Annapolis to consider matters of taxation and commerce. When the convention assembled in 1786, it was found that only five states had taken the trouble to send representatives. The leaders were deeply discouraged, but the resourceful Hamilton, a delegate from New York, turned the affair to good account. He secured the adoption of a resolution calling upon the Congress itself to summon another convention to meet at Philadelphia. A national convention called 1787. The Congress, as tardy as ever, at last decided in February 1787 to issue the call. Fearing drastic changes, however, restricted the convention to the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. Jealous of its own powers, it added that any alterations proposed should be referred to the Congress and the states for their approval. Every state in the Union, except Rhode Island, responded to this call. Indeed, some of the states, having the Annapolis resolution before them, had already anticipated the Congress by selecting delegates before the formal summons came, thus by the persistence of governors, legislatures and private citizens, there was brought about the long desired national convention. In May 1787, it assembled in Philadelphia. The eminent men of the convention. On the roll of that memorable convention were 55 men, at least half of whom were acknowledged to be among the foremost statesmen and thinkers in America. Every field of statecraft was represented by them. War and practical management in Washington, who was chosen president of the convention, diplomacy in Franklin, now old and full of honor in his own land as well as abroad, finance in Alexander Hamilton and Robert Morris, law in James Wilson of Pennsylvania, the philosophy of government in James Madison, called the father of the Constitution. They were not theorists but practical men, rich in political experience and endowed with deep insight into the springs of human action. Three of them had served in the Stamp Act Congress, Dickinson of Delaware, William Samuel Johnson of Connecticut and John Rutledge of South Carolina. Eight had been signers of the Declaration of Independence, Reed of Delaware, Sherman of Connecticut, Wythe of Virginia, Jerry of Massachusetts, Franklin, Robert Morris, George Clymer, and James Wilson of Pennsylvania. All but twelve had at some time served in the Continental Congress and eighteen were members of that body in the spring of 1787. Washington, Hamilton, Mifflin, and Charles Pinkney had been officers in the Revolutionary Army. Seven of the delegates had gained political experience as governors of states. The convention as a whole, according to historian Hildreth, represented in a marked manner the talent, intelligence, and especially the conservative sentiment of the country. Chapter 7. The Formation of the Constitution. The Promise and the Difficulties of America. The framing of the Constitution. Problems involved. The great problems before the convention were nine in number. One, shall the articles of confederation be revised or a new system of government constructed? Two, shall the government be founded on states equal in power as under the articles or on the broader and deeper foundation of population? Three, what direct share shall the people have in the election of national officers? Four, what shall be the qualifications for the suffrage? Five, how shall the conflicting interests of the commercial and the planting states be balanced so as to safeguard the essential rights of each? Six, what shall be the form of the new government? Seven, what powers shall be conferred on it? Eight, how shall the state legislatures be restrained from their attacks on property rights, such as the issuance of paper money? Nine, shall the approval of all the states be necessary, as under the articles for the adoption and amendment of the Constitution? Revision of the articles or a new government. The moment the first problem was raised, representatives of the small states, led by William Patterson of New Jersey, were on their feet. They feared that, if the articles were overthrown, the equality and rights of the states would be put in jeopardy. Their protest was therefore vigorous. They cited the call issued by the Congress in summoning the convention, which specifically stated that they were assembled for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. They also cited their instructions from their state legislatures, which authorize them to revise and amend the existing scheme of government, not to make a revolution in it. To depart from the authorization laid down by the Congress and the legislatures would be to exceed their powers, they argued, and to betray the trust reposed in them by their countrymen. To their contentions Randolph of Virginia replied, When the salvation of the Republic is at stake it would be treasoned to our trust not to propose what we find necessary. Hamilton, reminding the delegates that their work was still subject to the approval of the states, frankly said that on the point of their powers he had no scruples. With the issue clear the convention cast aside the Articles as if they did not exist and proceeded to the work of drawing up a new constitution, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to the delegates seemed most likely to affect their safety and happiness. A government founded on states or people, the compromise, defeated in their attempt to limit the convention to a mere revision of the Articles, the spokesmen of the smaller states redoubled their efforts to preserve the equality of the states. The signal for a radical departure from the Articles on this point was given early in the sessions when Randolph presented the Virginia Plan. He proposed that the new national legislature consist of two houses, the members of which were to be apportioned among the states according to their wealth or free white population as the convention might decide. This plan was vehemently challenged. Patterson of New Jersey flatly avowed that neither he nor his state would ever bow to such tyranny. As an alternative he presented the New Jersey Plan, calling for a national legislature of one house representing states as such, not wealth or people, a legislature in which all states, larger small, would have equal voice. Wilson of Pennsylvania, on behalf of the more populous states, took up the gauntlet which Patterson had thrown down. It was absurd, he urged, for one hundred and eighty thousand men in one state to have the same weight in national councils as seven hundred and fifty thousand men in another state. The gentleman from New Jersey, he said, is candid. He declares his opinion boldly. I will be equally candid. I will never confederate on his principles. So the bitter controversy ran on through many exciting sessions. Greek had met Greek. The convention was hopelessly deadlocked and on the verge of dissolution. Scarce held together by the strength of a hair, as one of the delegates remarked. A crash was averted only by a compromise. Instead of a Congress of one house as provided by the articles, the convention agreed upon a legislature of two houses. In the Senate the aspirations of the small states were to be satisfied, and the state was given two members in that body. In the formation of the House of Representatives the larger states were placated, for it was agreed that the members of that chamber were to be apportioned among the states on the basis of population, counting three-fifths of the slaves. The Question of Popular Election The method of selecting federal officers and members of Congress also produced an acrimonious debate which revealed how deep-seated was the distrust of the capacity of the people to govern themselves. The Question of Popular Election The method of selecting federal officers and members of Congress also produced an acrimonious debate which revealed how deep-seated was the distrust of the capacity of the people to govern themselves. Few there were who believed that no branch of the government should be elected directly by the voters. Fewer were there, however, who desired to see all branches so chosen. One or two even expressed a desire for a monarchy. The dangers of democracy were stressed by jerry of Massachusetts. All the evils we experience flow from an excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue but are the dupes of pretended patriots. I have been too Republican here to fore but have been taught by experience the danger of a leveling spirit. To the democratic licentiousness of the state legislatures Randolph sought to oppose a firm Senate. To check the excesses of popular government Charles Pinkney of South Carolina declared that no one should be elected president who was not worth $100,000 and that high property qualifications should be placed on members of Congress and judges. Other members of the convention were stoutly opposed to such high-toned notions of government. Franklin and Wilson, both from Pennsylvania, vigorously championed popular election while men like Madison insisted that at least one part of the government should rest on the broad foundation of the people. Out of this clash of opinion also came compromise. One branch, the House of Representatives, it was agreed, was to be elected directly by the voters while the senators were to be elected indirectly by the state legislatures. The president was to be chosen by electors selected as the legislatures of the states might determine and the judges of the federal courts supreme and inferior by the president and the Senate. The Question of the Suffrage The battle over the suffrage was sharp but brief. Governor Morris proposed that only landowners should be permitted to vote. Madison replied that the state legislatures which had made so much trouble with radical laws were elected by free holders. After the debate, the delegates unable to agree on any property limitations on the suffrage decided that the House of Representatives should be elected by voters having the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature. Thus they accepted the suffrage provisions of the states. The balance between the planting and the commercial states. After the debates had gone on for a few weeks, Madison came to the conclusion that the real division in the convention was not between the large and the small states but between the planting section founded on slave labor and the commercial north. Thus he anticipated by nearly three quarters of a century the irrepressible conflict. The planting states had neither the free white population nor the wealth of the north. There were, counting Delaware, six of them as against seven commercial states, dependent for their prosperity mainly upon the sale of tobacco, rice, and other staples abroad, they feared that Congress might impose restraints upon their enterprise. Being weaker in numbers, they were afraid that the majority might lay an unfair burden of taxes upon them. Representation and taxation. The southern members of the convention were therefore very anxious to secure for their section the largest possible representation in Congress and at the same time to restrain the taxing power of that body. Two devices were thought adapted to these ends. One was to count the slaves as people when apportioning representatives among the states according to their respective populations. The other was to provide that direct taxes should be apportioned among the states in proportion not to their wealth but to the number of their free white inhabitants. For obvious reasons the northern delegates objected to these proposals. Once more a compromise proved to be the solution. It was agreed that not all the slaves but three-fifths of them should be counted for both purposes. Representation and direct taxation. Commerce in the slave trade. Southern interests were also involved in the project to confer upon Congress the power to regulate interstate and foreign commerce. To the manufacturing and trading states this was essential. It would prevent interstate tariffs and trade jealousies. It would enable Congress to protect American manufacturers and to break down by appropriate retaliations foreign discriminations against American commerce. To the south the proposal was menacing because tariffs might interfere with the public's change of the produce of plantations in European markets and navigation acts might confine the carrying trade to American that is northern ships. The importation of slaves moreover it was feared might be heavily taxed or immediately prohibited altogether. The result of this in related controversies was a debate on the merits of slavery. Governor Morris delivered his mind and heart on that subject denouncing slavery as a nefarious institution and the curse of heaven on the states in which it prevailed. Mason of Virginia, a slave holder himself, was hardly less outspoken saying slavery discourages arts and manufacturers. The poor despise labor when performed by slaves. They prevent the migration of whites who really strengthen and enrich a country. The system, however, had its defenders. Representatives from South Carolina argued that their entire economic life rested on slave labor and that the high death rate in the rice swamps made continuous importation necessary. Ellsworth of Connecticut took the ground that the convention should not meddle with slavery. The morality or wisdom of slavery, he said, are considerations belonging to the states, what enriches a part enriches the whole. To the future he turned an untroubled face as population increases poor laborers will be so plenty as to render slaves useless. Slavery in time will not be a speck in our country. Virginia and North Carolina already overstocked with slaves favored prohibiting the traffic in them. But South Carolina was adamant she must have fresh supplies of slaves or she would not federate. So it was agreed that, while Congress might regulate foreign trade by majority vote the importation of slaves should not be forbidden before the lapse of twenty years and that any import tax should not exceed ten dollars ahead. At the same time, in connection with the regulation of foreign trade it was stipulated that a two-thirds vote in the Senate should be necessary in the ratification of treaties. A further concession to the South was made in the provision for the return of runaway slaves a provision also useful in the North where indentured servants were about as troublesome as slaves in escaping from their masters. The form of the government as to the details of the frame of government and the grand principles involved the opinion of the convention ebbed and flowed decisions being taken in the heat of debate only to be revoked and taken again. The executive there was general agreement that there should be an executive branch for reliance upon Congress to enforce its own laws and treaties had been a broken read. On the character and functions of the executive however there were many views. The New Jersey plan called for a council selected by the Congress. The Virginia plan provided that the executive branch should be chosen by the Congress but did not state whether it should be composed of one or several persons. On this matter the convention voted first one way and then another. Finally it agreed on a single executive chosen indirectly by electors selected as the state legislatures might decide serving for four years subject to impeachment and endowed with regal powers in the command of the army and the navy and in the enforcement of the laws. The legislative branch Congress after the convention had made the great compromise between the large and small commonwealths by giving representation to states in the Senate and to population in the House the question of methods of election had to be decided. As to the House of Representatives it was readily agreed that the members should be elected by direct popular vote. There was also easy agreement on the proposition that a strong Senate was needed to check the turbulence of the lower House. Four devices were finally selected to accomplish this purpose. In the first place the senators were not to be chosen directly by the voters but by the legislatures of the states thus removing their election one degree from the populace. In the second place their term was fixed at six years instead of two as in the case of the House. In the third place provision was made for continuity by having only one third of the members go out at a time while two thirds remained in service. Finally it was provided that senators must be at least 30 years old while representatives need be only 25. The Judiciary The need for federal courts to carry out the laws was hardly open to debate. The feebleness of the Articles of Confederation was, in a large measure, attributed to the want of a judiciary to hold states and individuals in obedience to the laws and treaties of the Union. Nevertheless on this point the advocates of states' rights were extremely sensitive. They looked with distrust upon judges appointed at the national capital and emancipated from local interests and traditions. They remembered with what insistence they had claimed against Britain the right of local trials by jury and with what consternation they had viewed the proposal to make colonial judges independent of the assemblies in the matter of their salaries. Reluctantly they yielded to the demand for federal courts consenting at first only to a supreme court to review cases heard in lower state courts and finally to such additional inferior courts as Congress might deem necessary. The System of Checks and Balances It is thus apparent that the framers of the Constitution in shaping the form of government arranged for a distribution of power among three branches executive, legislative and judicial. Strictly speaking we might say four branches for the legislature or Congress was composed of two houses elected in different ways and one of them the Senate was made a check on the President through its power of ratifying treaties and appointments. The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judicial in the same hands wrote Madison of one, a few or many and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elective may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. The devices which the convention adopted to prevent such a centralization of authority were exceedingly ingenious and well calculated to accomplish the purposes of the authors. The legislature consisted of two houses the members of which were to be apportioned on a different basis, elected in different ways and to serve for different terms. A veto on all its acts was vested in a president elected in a manner not employed in the choice of either branch of the legislature serving for four years and subject to removal only by the difficult process of impeachment. After a law had run the gauntlet of both houses and the executive it was subject to interpretation and annulment by the judiciary appointed by the president with the consent of the senate and serving for life. Thus it was made almost impossible for any political party to get possession of all branches of the government at a single popular election. As Hamilton remarked the friends of good government considered every institution calculated to restrain the excess of lawmaking and to keep things in the same state in which they happen to be at any given period as more likely to do good than harm. The powers of the federal government On the question of the powers to be conferred upon the new government there was less occasion for a serious dispute. Even the delegates from the small states agreed with those from Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and Virginia that new powers should be added to those entrusted to Congress by the Articles of Confederation. The New Jersey plan as well as the Virginia plan recognized this fact. Some of the delegates, like Hamilton and Madison, even proposed to give Congress a general legislative authority covering all national matters. But others, frightened by the specter of nationalism insisted on specifying each power to be conferred and finally carried the day. Taxation and commerce There were none bold enough to dissent from the proposition that revenue must be provided to pay current expenses and discharge the public debt when once the dispute over the apportionment of direct taxes among the slave states was settled it was an easy matter to decide that Congress should have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises. In this way the national government was freed from dependence upon stubborn and tardy legislatures and enabled to collect funds directly from the citizens. There were likewise none bold enough to contend that the anarchy of state and trade discriminations should be longer endured. When the fears of the planting states were allayed and the bargain over the importation of slaves was reached the convention vested in Congress the power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce. National defense The necessity for national defense was realized though the fear of huge military establishments was equally present. The old practice of relying on quotas furnished by the state legislatures was completely discredited. As in the case of taxes a direct authority over citizens was demanded. Congress was therefore given full power to raise and support armies and a navy. It could employ the state militia when desirable but it could at the same time maintain a regular army and call directly upon all able-bodied males if the nature of a crisis was thought to require it. Necessary and proper clause To the specified power vested in Congress by the Constitution the advocates of a strong national government added a general clause authorizing it to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into effect any and all of the enumerated powers. This clause interpreted by that mastermind Chief Justice Marshall was later construed to confer powers as wide as the requirements of a vast country spanning a continent and taking its place among the mighty nations of the earth. Restraints on the states Framing a government and endowing it with large powers were by no means the sole concern of the convention. Its very existence had been due quite as much to the conduct of the state legislatures as to the futilities of a paralyzed continental Congress. In every state Marshall in his life of Washington there was a party of men who had marked out for themselves a more indulgent course. Viewing with extreme tenderness the case of the debtor their efforts were unceasingly directed to his relief. To exact a faithful compliance with contracts was, in their opinion, a harsh measure which the people could not bear. They were uniformly in favor of relaxing the administration of justice of affording facilities for the payment of debts or of suspending their collection and remitting taxes. The legislature under the dominance of these men had enacted paper money laws enabling debtors to discharge their obligations more easily. The convention put an end to such practices by providing that no state should emit bills of credit or make anything but gold or silver legal tender in the payment of debts. The state legislatures had enacted laws allowing men to pay their debts by turning over to creditors land or personal property. They had repealed the charter of an endowed college and taken the management from the hands of the lawful trustees and they had otherwise interfered with the enforcement of private agreements. The convention, taking notice of such matters, inserted a clause forbidding states to impair the obligation of contracts. The more venturous of the radicals had in Massachusetts raised the standard of revolt against the authorities of the state, the convention answered by a brief sentence to the effect that the President of the United States to be equipped with a regular army would send troops to suppress domestic insurrections whenever called upon by the legislature or, if it was not in session, by the Governor of the State to make sure that the restrictions on the states would not be dead letters, the Federal Constitution, laws and treaties were made by the Supreme Law of the Land to be enforced whenever necessary by a national judiciary and executive against violations on the part of any state authorities. Provisions for ratification and amendment. When the frame of government had been determined the powers to be vested in it had been enumerated and the restrictions upon the states had been written into the bond contained three final questions. How shall the Constitution be ratified? What number of states shall be necessary to put it into effect? How shall it be amended in the future? On the first point, the mandate under which the convention was sitting seemed positive. The articles of confederation were still in effect. They provided that amendments could be made only by unanimous adoption in Congress and the approval of all the states as if to give force to this provision of law the call for the convention had expressly stated that all alterations and revisions should be reported to Congress for adoption or rejection. Congress itself to transmit the document thereafter to the states for their review. To have observed the strict letter of the law would have defeated the purposes of the delegates because Congress and the state legislatures were openly hostile to its drastic changes as had been made. Unanimous ratification as events proved would have been impossible. Therefore the delegates decided that the Constitution should be sent to Congress with the recommendation that it in turn transmit the document not to the state legislatures but to conventions held in the states for the special object of deciding upon ratification. This process was followed. It was their belief that special conventions were more friendly than the state legislatures. The convention was equally positive in dealing with the problem of the number of states necessary to establish the new Constitution. Attempts to change the articles had failed because amendment required the approval of every state and there was always at least one recalcitrant member of the Union. The opposition to a new Constitution was undoubtedly formidable. Rhode Island had even refused to take part in framing it and her hostility was deep and open. So the convention cast aside the provision of the Articles of Confederation which required unanimous approval for any changes in the plan of government. It decreed that the new Constitution should go into effect when ratified by nine states. In providing for future changes in the Constitution itself the convention also thrust aside the old rule of unanimous approval and decided that an amendment could be made on a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states. This change was of profound significance. Every state agreed to be bound in the future by amendments duly adopted even in case it did not approve them itself. America in this way set out upon the high road that led from a League of States to a nation. End of Section 2 Section 3 of History of the United States by Charles Beard and Mary Ritter Beard Part 3 This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org Recording by Leon Meyer The Struggle of Ratification On September 17th, 1787 the Constitution, having been finally drafted in clear and simple language, a model to all makers of fundamental law, was adopted. The convention, after nearly four months of debate and secret session, flung open the doors and presented to the Americans the finished plan for the new government. Then the great debate passed to the people. The Opposition Storms of criticism met once descended upon the Constitution. Fraudulent usurpation exclaimed Gary, who had refused to sign it. A monster out of the thick veil of secrecy declaimed a Pennsylvania newspaper. An iron-handed despotism will be the result, protested a third. We, the low-born, sarcastically wrote a fourth, will now admit the 600 well-born immediately to establish this most noble, most excellent and truly divine Constitution. The President will become a king. Congress will be as tyrannical as Parliament in the old days. The states will be swallowed up. The rights of the people will be trampled upon. The poor man's justice will be lost in the endless delays of the federal courts. Such was the strain of the protests against ratification. Defense of the Constitution Moved by the tempest of opposition, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay took up their pens in defense of the Constitution. In a series of newspaper articles they discussed and expounded with eloquence, learning, and dignity every important clause and provision of the proposed plan. These papers, afterwards collected and published in a volume known as the Federalist, form the finest textbook on the Constitution that has ever been printed. It takes its place moreover, among the wisest and wadiest treatises on government ever written in any language in any time. Other men, not so gifted, were no less earnest in their support of ratification. In private correspondence, editorials, pamphlets, and letters to the newspapers, they urged their countrymen to forget their partisanship and accept a Constitution which, in spite of any defects great or small, was the only guarantee against dissolution in warfare at home and dishonor and weakness abroad. The Action of the State Conventions Before the end of the year, 1787, three states had ratified the Constitution. Delaware and New Jersey unanimously in Pennsylvania after a short, though savage, contest. Connecticut and Georgia followed early the next year. Then came the Battle Royale in Massachusetts, ending in ratification in February by the narrow margin of 187 votes to 168. In the spring came the news that Maryland and South Carolina were under the new roof. On June 21, New Hampshire, where the sentiment was at first strong enough to defeat the Constitution, joined the New Republic, influenced by the decision in Massachusetts. Swift couriers were sent to carry the news to New York and Virginia, where the question of ratification was still undecided. Nine states had accepted it and were united, whether more so fit to join or not. Meanwhile, however, Virginia, after a long and searching debate, had given her approval by a narrow margin, leaving New York as the next seat of anxiety. In that state the popular vote for the delegates to the convention had been clearly and heavily against ratification. Events finally demonstrated the futility of resistance and Hamilton, by good judgment and master of the arguments, was at last able to marshal a majority of 30 to 37 votes in favor of ratification. The great contest was over. All the states, except North Carolina and Rhode Island, had ratified. The sloop anarchy, wrote an abolient journalist, when last heard from was a shore on Union rocks. The first election. In the autumn of 1788 elections were held to fill the places in the new government. Public opinion was overwhelmingly in favor of Washington as the first president. Yielding to the importanities of friends, he accepted the post in the spirit of public service. On April 30th, 1789 he took the oath of office at Federal Hall in New York City. Long lived George Washington, president of the United States, cried Chancellor Livingston, as soon as the general had kissed the Bible. The cry was caught by the assembled multitude and given back. A new experiment in popular government was launched. References M. Farrand, the framing of the Constitution of the United States. P. L. Ford, essays on the Constitution of the United States. The Federalist, in many editions. G. Hunt, life of James Madison. A. C. McLaughlin, the Confederation in the Constitution, American Nation Series. Questions 1. Account for the failure of the Articles of Confederation. 2. Explain the domestic difficulties of the individual states. 3. Why did efforts at reform by the Congress come to naught? 4. Narrate the events leading up to the Constitutional Convention. 5. Who were some of the leading men in the Convention? What had been their previous training? 6. State the great problems before the Convention. 7. In what respects were the planting and commercial states opposed? What compromises were reached? 8. Show how the second-balance system is embodied in our form of government. 9. How did the powers conferred upon the Federal Government help cure the defects of the Articles of Confederation? 10. In what way did the provisions for ratifying and amending the Constitution depart from the old system? 11. What was the nature of the conflict over ratification? 3. Section 4 of the history of the United States by Charles A. Beard and Mary Ritter Beard. 3. The Union and National Politics. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in a public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org The Rise of Political Parties Dissenting over Hamilton's measures Hamilton's plan touching deeply as they did the resources of individuals in the interests of the states awaiting an alarm and opposition. Funding at face value, said his critics, was a government favored to speculators. And the assumption of state depths was a deep design to undermine the state government. Congress had no constitutional power to create a bank. The law creating the bank rarely allowed private corporations to make proper money and lunded at a high rate of interest. And the tariff was taxed online and labor for the benefit of the manufacturers. Hamilton's reply to this bill of the endowment was simple and straightforward. Some rascally speculators had profited from the funding of the debt at face value. But that was only an incident in the restoration of public credit. In the view of the jealousies of the states, it was a good thing to reduce their powers to the extent that the banks would be able to do so. But the bank would enlarge the amount of capital so sorely needed to start out the American industries, giving markets to farmers and planters. The tariff by creating a home market and increasing opportunities for employment would benefit both land and labor. Out of such wise policies firmly pursued by the government, he concluded he was bound to come strength and prosperity for the new government at home, credit and power abroad. This view Washington fully endorsed, adding the weight of the great name of the inheriting merits on the measures adopted under his administration. The sharpness of partisan conflict as a result of the clash of opinion, the people of the country gradually divided into two parties Federalist and Anti-Federalist the former led by Hamilton the later by Jefferson The strengths of the Federalists lay in the cities Boston, Providence Hartford, New York, Philadelphia Charleston among manufacturing financial and commercial groups of the population who were eager to extend their business operations and the strengths of the Anti-Federalists lay mainly among the debt burdened farmers who feared growth of what they called a money power and planters in all sections who feared dominance of commercial and manufacturing interest. The farming and planting south outside of the few towns finally presented an almost solid front against assumption, the bank and the tariff. The conflict between the parties grew steadily in bitterness despite the conciliatory engaging manner in which Hamilton presented his cause in the state papers despite the constant effort Washington to soften the asperity of the contestants. The leadership and doctrines of Jefferson The party dispute had not gone far before the opponents of the administration began to look at Jefferson as their leader. Some of Hamilton's measure he had approved declaring afterwards that he did not at the time understand their significance. Others particularly the bank he fiercely assailed. More than once he and Hamilton shaking violently with anger attacked each other at cabinet meetings and nothing short of the grave and dignified pleas of Washington prevented an early and open break between them. In 1794 it had finally came. Jefferson resigned as secretary of the state and retired to his home in Virginia to assume through correspondence and negotiation the leadership of steady growing party of opposition Shaw and modest in manner halting in speech disliking the turmoil of public debate and deeply interested in science and philosophy. Jefferson was not very well fitted for the strenuous life of political contest. Nevertheless he was an ambitious and sure negotiator. He was also by honest opinion matured conviction the exact opposite of Hamilton. The leader believed in a strong active high toned government vigorously compelling in all its branches. Jefferson looked at such a government as dangerous to the liberties of citizens and openly about his faith and the desirability of the occasional popular uprising. Hamilton distressed people, quote your people is a great beast he is reported to have said. Jefferson professed his faith in the people with an abandon that was considered reckless in his time. On economic matters the opinions of two leaders were also hopelessly at variance. Hamilton while cherishing agriculture desired to see America a great commercial and industrial nation. Jefferson was equally set against the course for his country. He feared that the accumulation of riches and growth in large urban working class the mobs of great cities he said are sores on the body politic. Artisans are usually the dangerous element that make revolutions. Workshop should be kept in Europe and with the artisans and their insidious morals and manners. The only substantial foundation for Republic Jefferson believed to be agriculture. The spirit of independence could only be kept alive by free farmers owning land they tilled and looking to the sun and heaven and the labor of their hands for their sustenance. Trusting as he did in the innate goodness of human nature when nourished by free soil, Jefferson advocated those measures and calculated to favor agriculture to enlarge the rights of the persons rather than the powers of government. Thus he became a champion of the individual against interference of the government and an ardent advocate of freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of scientific inquiry. It was accordingly no more fictitious spirit that drove him into opposition to Hamilton. The whiskey rebellion. The political agitation of the anti-Federalists was accompanied by an armed revolt against the government in 1794. The occasion for this uprising was another of Hamilton's measures a law laying an excise tax on distilled spirits for the purpose of increasing revenue needed to pay the interest of the funded debt. It so happened to be a very considerable part of the whiskey manufacturer in the country was made by farmers, especially on the frontier in their own stills. The new revenue law meant that federal officers would now come into the homes of people, measure their looker and take the taxes out of their pockets. All the bitterness of the farmers felt against the fiscal measures of the government was redoubled. In the western districts of Pennsylvania Virginia and North Carolina they refused to pay the tax and Pennsylvania sold them sacked and burned the houses of the debt collectors as revolutionists 30 years before had mobbed against agents of King George sent over to sell stamps. They were in a far away to nullify the law in the whole districts when Washington called out the truth to suppress the whiskey rebellion. Then the movement collapsed but it left behind deep-seated resentment which flared up in the election of several Alderite anti-Federalist congressmen from the disaffected region. The French Revolution In this exciting period when all of America was distracted by partisan disputes a storm broke out in Europe an epoch linking French Revolution which not only shook the thrones of the old world but stirred into its depths a young republic into the new worlds. The first scene of this dramatic affair was in the spring of 1789 a few days after Washington was inaugurated the king of France Louis XVI driven into bankruptcy by extravagance and costly wars he was forced to resort to his people for financial help. Accordingly he called for the first time in more than 150 years a meeting of the national parliaments the estates general composed the representatives of the three estates of the country acting under powerful leaders as commoner or the third estate swept aside the clergy and nobility and resolved themselves into national assembly this stirred the country to its depths Louis XVI in the hands of the mob great defense for all of the Swiss succession on July 14th 1789 the vestille an old royal prison was stormed by a Paris crowd and destroyed on the 9th of August 4th the feudal privileges of the nobility were abolished by the national assembly amid great excitement a few days later came the famous declaration of the rights of men proclaiming sovereignty of the people and privileges of its citizens in autumn 1791 Louis XVI was forced to accept a new constitution for France vesting legislative power a little disorder accompanied the startling changes to all appearances a peaceful revolution had stripped the French king of his royal prerogatives and based the government of his country and the consent of the governed American influence in France in undertaking their great political revolt the French had been encouraged by the outcome of the American Revolution officers and soldiers who had served in the American war reported to their French countrymen of marvelous tales a beautiful table of general Washington in a council of the unpretentious Franklin or at the conferences over the strategy of war French noblemen of the ancient lineage learned to respect both the talents and the simple character of the leaders in the great republican Commonwealth beyond the seas travelers who had gone to see the experiment in republicanism with their own eyes carried home to the king and ruling class stories of government on the other hand was regarded by the French conservatives as playing with fire quote when we think of false ideas of government and philanthropy wrote one of Lafayette's aides which these youth acquired America and propagated in France with so much enthusiasm and such deplorable success for this media of intimidation powerfully aided revolution so it was not the sole cause of it we are bound to confess that it would have been better both for themselves and for us if these young philosophers and red-heeled shoes would stay at home in attendance on the court early American opinion of the French Revolution so close to the ties between the two nations that it is not surprising to find every step in the first stages of the French Revolution greeted with applause in the United States quote Liberty will have another feather in her cap exultantly wrote a Boston editor in no part of the globe so really wrote John Marshall was this revolution hailed with more joy than in America but one sentiment existed the main key to best still sent Washington as a memento was accepted as a token of victory gained by Liberty Thomas Painsaw the great event the first ripe fruits of the American principle transported into Europe Federalists and anti-Federalists regarded the new constitution of France as another vindication of American ideals the reign of terror while profuse congratulations were being exchanged rumors began to come that all was not well in France many noblemen enraged at the loss of their special privileges and plotted an invasion of France to overthrow the new system of government Louis XVI entered the negotiations with his brother Monarchs on content to secure their help in the same enterprise and he finally betrayed the French people his true sentiment by attempting to escape his kingdom only to be captured and taken back to Paris in disgrace a new phase of government had now opened the working people excluded from all share of government the first French constitution became restless especially in Paris assembling the camps in Mars a great open field they signed a petition calling for another constitution giving them suffrage when told to disperse they refused and were fired upon by the National Guard this massacre as it was called enraged the populace a radical party known as a Jacobin then spring up taking his name from Jacobin monastery in which it held its sessions a little while it became a master of popular convention convoked in September of 1792 the monarch was immediately abolished and the republic established on January 21st 1793 Louis was sent to the scaffold to the war in Austria already raging was added a war on England then came a reign of terror during which radicals in possession of the convention executed in large number counter-revolutionist and the suspected sympathy of those with the monarchy they shot down peasants who rose in the insurrection against their rule and established a relentless dictatorship civil war followed terrible atrocities were committed on both sides in the name of liberty and in the name of monarchy to Americans of the conservative temper it was now assumed that the revolution so auspiciously begun had degraded into anarchy and mere bloodthirsty strife Burke summons to the world war on France in England Edmund Burke led the fight against the new French principles in which he feared might spread to all of Europe in his reflections on the French Revolution written in 1790 he attacked with terrible wrath the whole program of popular government he called for war relentless war upon the French as monsters and outlaws he demanded that they be reduced to order by the restoration of the king to full power under the protection of the arms of the European nation Payne's defense of the French Revolution to counteract the campaign of hate against the French Thomas Payne replied to Burke in another of the famous tracks The Rives of Man by the American public in an edition containing the letter of approval from Jefferson Burke said Payne had now been mourning about the glories of the French monarchy and aristocracy but had not forgotten the starving peasants and the oppressed people he'd wept over plumage and neglected the dying Burke Burke had denied the rights of the French people to choose their own governors planning forgetting that the English government had no protection itself rested on two revolutions he had boasted that the king of England held his crown in contempt of the democratic societies Payne answered if I ask a man in America if he wants a king he retorts and asks me if I take him for an idiot to the charge of the doctrines of the rights of man war newfangled Payne replied that the question whether they were new or old or whether they were right or wrong as the French disorders and difficulties he paid the world to wait and see what would be brought forth in due time the effect of the French Revolution on American politics the course of the French Revolution and the controversies accompanying it exercised profound influence on the formation of the first political parties in America the followers of Hamilton of the name Federalist drew back in fright as they heard of the cool deeds committed during the reign of terror they turned savagely upon the revolutionists and their friends in America denouncing as Jacobin everybody who did not condemn loudly enough the proceedings of the French Republic as Massasurge's preacher roundly assailed that the aesthetical and archial and other respects and moral principles of the French Republicans he then proceeded with equal passion to attack Jefferson and the other anti-Federalists whom he charged with spreading false French propaganda and portraying America the editors, patrons, and abetors of these vehicles of slander he explained ought to be considered and treated as enemies of their country of all traitors who are most aggravately criminal of all villains they are most infamous and detestable the anti-Federalists were generally fair rules of the revolution although they deployed many of the events associated with it Payne's pamphlet endorsed by Jefferson was widely read democratic societies after the fashion of French political clubs arose in the cities the coalition of European monarchs against France was denounced as a coalition against very principles of republicanism and the execution of Louis XVI was openly celebrated at the banquet in Philadelphia almost titles such as Sir and the Honorable and His Excellency were decreed as aristocratic and some of the more excited and insisted on adopting the French title Citizen, speaking for example Citizen Judge, Citizen Toastmaster pamphlets were in defense of the French streamed from the press while subsidized newspapers kept propaganda in full swing the European war disturbs the American commerce this battle of woods or rather the contests and colony might have gone on indefinitely in America without producing any serious results had it not been for the war between England and France than raging the English having command of the seas claimed the right to seize Americans produced found for French ports and to confiscate American ships British goods adding fuel to the fire already hot enough they began to search for American ships and to carry off British foreign sailors they found on American vessels the French appeal for help at the same time the fresh republican turned to the United States for aid in its war in England sent over as diplomatic representative Citizen, Gent an ardent supporter of the new order on his arrival at Charleston he was greeted with fervor by the anti-Federalist and made his way north he was wind and dined and given popular ovations that turned his head he thought the whole country is ready to join the French Revolution in its contests with England therefore attempted to use American ports as a base of operations for French privateers preying on British merchant ships he insisted that the United States was an honor bound to help France under the treaty of 1778 the proculation of neutrality and the jay treaty unmoved by the rising tide of popular sympathy for France Washington took a firm course he received Gent coldly the demand that the United States aid France under the old treaty of alliance he answered by proclaiming the neutrality of America and warning American citizens against hostile acts towards either France or England when Genet continued to hold meetings in issue manifestos the syrup between people against England and Washington asked the French government to recall him this act followed by the sending of Chief Justice John Jay on a pacific mission to England the result was celebrated jay treaty of 1794 by its terms the Great Britain agreed to withdraw her troops from the western forts where they have been since the war for independence and grant certain slight of trade concessions the chief sources of bitterness of failure of British to return slaves carried off during the revolution the seizure of American ships the impression of sailors were not touched much of the stress of everybody in America including world federalists nevertheless Washington dreaded the armed conflict with England urged the senate to ratify the treaty the weight of its influence carried the day at this the hostility of the anti-federalist knew no bounds Jefferson declared that the jay treaty quote, an infamous act which is really nothing more than alliance between England and the Anglo men of this country against the legislature of the people of the United States Hamilton defended it and his usual courage was stoned by a mob in New York and driven from the platform from his face jay burned in effigy even Washington was not spared the house of representatives was hopefully hostile to display the feelings it called upon the president for papers relative to the treaty negotiations only to be more highly incensed by the thought refusal to present them on the ground that the house did not share in the same treaty making power Washington retires from politics such angry contest confirms the president in slowly maturing determination to retire at the end of the second term in office he did not believe that the third term was unconstitutional or improper but worn by the long and arduous labors in war and in peace and wounded by harsh attacks from former friends he longed for the quiet of his beautiful estate at Mount Berman in September of 1796 on the eve of the presidential election Washington issued his farewell address another state paper to be treasured and read by generations of Americans to come in this address he directed the attention of the people to three subjects of lasting interest he warned them against sectional jealousies he remonstrated against the spirit of partisanship saying that in government of popular character in government purely elective it is in the spirit not to be encouraged he likewise cautioned people against quote the insidious whales of foreign influence saying that your past set a primary interest which to us have none or very remote relation hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns hence therefore it would be unwise for us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in ordinary vasectitudes or politics or ordinary combinations and collisions of friendships or an enemies why forego the advantages of such a peculiar situation it is our true policy to steer clear of the permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world taking care to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable and defensive posture we may safely trust the temporary alliances for an extraordinary emergencies the campaign of 1796 Adams elected on hearing of the retirement of Washington the anti-Federalists cast off all restraints in the honor of France and the opposition to what they were pleased to call the monarchal tendencies of the Federalists they boldly assumed that the name Republican the term Democrat then applied only to obscure and despised radicals that had not come into general use they selected Jefferson as a candidate for president against John Adams and the Federalist nominee carried the spirited campaign that came with four votes of electing him the successful candidate Adams was not fitted by training or opinion on conciliating determined opposition he was reserved for the studious man he was neither a good speaker nor a skillful negotiator in one of his books he had declared himself in favor of a quote government by a riskary of talents and wealth an offense which Republicans never forgave while John Marshall found him a sensible, plain, candid and good tempered man Jefferson could see in him nothing but a monocrat and an Anglo man it had not been for the conduct of the French government Adams would highly have enjoyed moments of genuine popularity during his administration the quarrel with France the French directly the executive department established under the constitution of 1795 managed, however, to stir anger of Republicans and Federalists alike in the regard to the J Treaty the rebuke of France the flagrant violation of the obligation of Solomon registered in the Treaty of 1778 accordingly it refused the American minister treated him in a humiliating way and finally told him to leave the country overlooking this affront in the anxiety to maintain peace Adams dispatched to France the commission of eminent men with instructions to reach the understanding with the French Republic on their arrival they were privileged to find instead of a decent reception an indirect demand for apology respecting the past conduct of the American government and an annual tribute as the price of their continued friendship with the news of this affair reached President Adams he promptly laid it before Congress referring to the French men who had made the demands as Mr X, Mr Y and Mr Z this insult coupled with the fact that the French privateers like the British were preying on American commerce enraged even the Republicans who had the loudest in their profession of their French sympathies they forgot their wrath over the J Treaty and joined with the Federalist in shouting millions for defense not a cent for tribute preparations for war were made in every hand Washington was once more called for Mount Vernon to take his old position at the head of the army indeed fighting actually began on the high seas and went on without formal declaration of war until the year 1800 by that time the directory had been overthrown a treaty was readily made with Napoleon the first consul who was beginning his remarkable career as the chief of the French Republic soon to be turned into an empire alien and sedition laws flourished the success the Federalist determined if possible to put an end to the radical French influence in America and to silence the Republican opposition they therefore passed two drastic laws in the summer of 1798 the alien and sedition acts the first of these measures empowered the President to expel from the country or to imprison any alien whom he regarded as dangerous or had reasonable grounds to suspect of any reasonable or secret machinations against the government the second of measures the sedition act penalized not only those who attempted to stir up unlawful combinations against the government but also everyone who wrote, uttered or published quote any false scandals or malicious writing against the government of the United States or either the House of Congress or the President of the United States with intent to defame said government or to bring them or either of them into content or disrepute this measure was hurried through Congress in spite of the opposition include provision in the Constitution that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press even many Federalists fear that the consequences of the action Hamilton was alarmed when he read the bill, exclaiming let us not establish a tyranny energy is very different from thing from violence John Marshall told his friends in Virginia that he had been in Congress that he would oppose two bills because he thought them useless calculated to create unnecessary discontents and jealousies the alien law was not enforced but was given greater funds to the Irish and French whose activities against the American government's policy respecting Great Britain to put in the danger of prison the sedation law on the other hand was vigorously applied several editors of the Republican newspaper soon found themselves in jail or broken by ruinous find for their fantastic criticism of the Federalist president and his policies bystanders at political meetings who uttered sentiments which through ungenerous and severe seeming harmless enough now were hurried before Federalist judge and probably find and imprisoned although the prosecutions were not numerous they aroused a keen resentment the Republicans were convinced of their political opponents having settled upon the country's and Hamilton's fiscal system and the British treaty were bent on silencing all censure the measure therefore had exactly the opposite effect on what their authorities intended instead of helping the Federalist party they made criticism of once more bitter than ever the Kentucky and Virginia revolutions Jefferson was quick to take advantage of the discontent after the set of revolutions declaring this addition law null and void violating the Federal Constitution his resolutions were passed by the Kentucky legislature late in 1798 signed by the governor and transmitted to other states for their consideration though receiving unfavorable replies for a number of northern states Kentucky followed year reaffirm disposition and declared that the nullification of all unconstitutional acts of Congress was the right remedy to be used by the states in the redness of grievances it was thus defied the American government and announced a doctrine hostile to nationality and fought with the terrible meaning for the future in the neighboring state of Virginia Madison led a movement against the alien and sedition laws he induced legislature to pass resolutions condemning the acts as unconstitutional and calling upon the other states to take proper measures to preserve their rights and the rights of the people the republican triumph in the 1800 thus the way it was prepared for the election of 1800 the republican left no stone unturned in their efforts to place the Federalist candidate President Adams all the odom of the alien and sedition laws in addition to the responsibility for approving Hamilton's measures and policies the Federalists divided in councils and called in their affection for Adams a poor campaign they tried to discredit their opponents with evidence of Jacobians and the anarchists in terms of being weakened by excessive use when the vote was counted it was found that Adams had been defeated while the Republicans had carried the entire South and New York also secured 8 of the 15 electoral votes cast by Pennsylvania quote our beloved Adams will now close his bright career lamented a Federalist newspaper sons of faction demagogues high priest of anarchy now you have caused a triumph a quarrel between Federalists and Republican in the House of Representatives Jefferson's election however was still uncertain by a curious provision of the Constitution presidential electors were required to vote for two persons without indicating which office was each to fill one was receiving the highest number of votes through the president and candidate standing next to be vice president it so happened that Aaron Burr the Republican candidate for vice president had received the same number of votes as Jefferson and neither a majority of the election was thrown into the House of Representatives while the Federalists held the balance of power although it was well known that Burr was not even a candidate for president his friends and many of the Federalists began intriguing his election to the high office had it not been for the vigorous action of Hamilton the prize might have been snatched out of Jefferson's hand not until 36th ballot on February 17th 1801 was a great issue decided in his favor references GS Bassett the Federalist System American National Series CA Beard Economic Origins of the Jeffersonian Democracy H. Lodge Alexander Hamilton J. T. Morris Thomas Jefferson Questions Who are the leaders of the first administration under the Constitution 2. What stuff was taken to appease the opposition 3. Enumerate Hamilton's great measures to explain each detail 4. Show the connection between the parts of Hamilton's system 5. Contrast the general political views of Hamilton and Jefferson 6. What were the important results of the peaceful French Revolution 1789 to 92 7. Explain the interaction of the opinion between France and the United States 8. How did the reign of terror change American opinion 9. What was the Burke Paine controversy 10. Show how the war in Europe affected American commerce and involved America with England and France 11. What were American policies with regard to each of those countries 12. What was the outcome of the alien and sedition acts 13. Research topics 14. Early federal legislation 15. Command industrial history of the United States 16. Page 133 to 156 16. Elsin history of the United States 17. Page 341 to 348 17. Hamilton report on public credit, McDonald's documentary source book page 233 to 243 17. The French Revolution in Europe, volume 1 pages 224 to 282 Elsin page 351 to 354 17. The Burke Paine controversy 18. Make an analysis of Burke's reflection on the French Revolution and pain rights of men. Alien and Sedition Act, McDonald's documentary source book 19. Page 259 to 267 pages 367 to 375 19. Kentucky and Virginia resolutions 19. McDonald's page 267 to 278 19. Source studies, materials and heart, American history told by contemporaries, volume 3 pages 255 to 343 19. Biographical studies 19. Alexander Hamilton 19. John Adams 19. Thomas Jefferson 19. Albert Gallington 19. The 12th Amendment 19. Contrast the provision 19. An original constitution 19. With terms of the amendment 19. See appendix 19. Put notes 19. North Carolina 19. Badified November 19. 1789 19. And Rhode Island 19. In May of 1790 19. The 12th Amendment of the Constitution 19. Was adopted in 1904 19. Changing slightly the method 19. Of electing the president 19. End of section 4 Section 8b of the history 19. Of the United States by Charles A. Beard 19. And Mary Ritter Beard Part 3 The Union and National 19. Politics 19. This is a LibriVox recording. 19. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. 19. For more information or to volunteer 19. Please visit LibriVox.org 19. Recording by Kristi Noak 19. The history of the United States 19. By Charles A. Beard and Mary Ritter Beard 19. Part 3 19. Section 8b, clash of political parties 19. Foreign influences 19. And domestic politics 19. The French Revolution 19. In this exciting period 19. When all America was distracted 19. By partisan disputes 19. A storm broke in Europe 19. The epic-making French Revolution 19. Which not only shook the thrones 19. Of the new world 19. The first scene in this dramatic 19. Affair occurred in the spring of 1789 19. A few days after Washington 19. Was inaugurated. 19. The King of France, Louis XVI 19. Driven into bankruptcy 19. By extravagance and costly wars 19. Was forced to resort to his people 19. For financial help. 19. Accordingly he called 19. For the first time in more than 19. 150 years a meeting 19. Of the National Parliament 19. Of the military estates 19. The clergy, nobility 19. And commoners. 19. Acting under powerful leaders 19. The commoners or third estate 19. Swept aside the clergy 19. And nobility and resolved themselves 19. Into a national assembly 19. This stirred the country to its depths. 19. Great events followed 19. In swift succession 19. On July 14th, 1789 19. The best deal 19. An old royal prison 19. On the night of August 4th 19. The feudal privileges of the nobility 19. Were abolished by the National Assembly 19. Amid great excitement. 19. A few days later came the famous 19. Declaration of the Rights of Man 19. Proclaiming the sovereignty of the people 19. And the privileges of citizens 19. In the autumn of 1791 19. Louis XVI was forced 19. To accept a new constitution 19. For France vesting the legislative power 19. In a popular assembly 19. Little disorder accompanied 19. By war experiences, a peaceful revolution 19. Had stripped the French king of his royal 19. Paragatives and based the government 19. Of his country on the consent of the governed 19. American influence 19. In France, in undertaking 19. Their great political revolt 19. The French had been encouraged by the outcome 19. Of the American Revolution 19. Officers and soldiers who had served 19. In the American War reported to their 19. French countrymen marvelous tales 19. At the frugal table of general Washington 19. In council with the unpretentious Conferences over the strategy of war, French noblemen of ancient lineage learned to respect both the talents and the simple character of the leaders in the great Republican Commonwealth beyond the seas. Travelers, who had gone to see the experiment in Republicanism with their own eyes, carried home to the king in ruling class stories of an astounding system of popular government. On the other hand, the dalliance with American democracy was regarded by French conservatives as playing with fire. When we think of the false ideas of government and philanthropy, wrote one of Lafayette's aides, which these youths acquired in America and propagated in France with so much enthusiasm and deplorable success for this mania of imitation powerfully aided by the revolution, though it was not the sole cause of it, we are bound to confess that it would have been better, both for themselves and for us if these young philosophers in red-heeled shoes had stayed at home in attendance on the court. So close were the ties between the two nations that it is not surprising to find every step in the first stages of the French Revolution greeted with applause in the United States. Liberty will have another feather in her cap, exultantly wrote a Boston editor. In no part of the globe, soberly wrote John Marshall, was this revolution hailed with more joy than in America, but one sentiment existed. The main key to the best deal, sent to Washington as a memento, was accepted as a token of the victory gained by liberty. Thomas Paine saw in the great event the first ripe fruits of American principles transplanted into Europe. Federalists and anti-Federalists regarded the new Constitution of France as another vindication of American ideals. While profuse congratulations were being exchanged, rumors began to come that all was not well in France. Many noblemen, enraged at the loss of their special privileges, fled into Germany and plotted an invasion of France to overthrow the new system of government. Louis XVI entered into negotiations with his brother monarchs on the continent to secure their help in the same enterprise and he finally betrayed to the French people his true sentiments by attempting to escape from his kingdom only to be captured and taken back to Paris in disgrace. A new phase of the revolution now opened. The working people, excluded from all share in the government by the first French Constitution, became restless, especially in Paris. Assembling on Champs-de-Mars, a great open field, they signed a petition calling for another Constitution giving them the suffrage. When told to disperse, they refused and were fired upon by the National Guard. This massacre, as it was called, enraged the populace. A radical party, known as the Jacobins, then sprang up, taking its name from a Jacobin monastery in which it held its sessions. In a little while it became the master of the popular convention convoked in September 1792. The monarchy was immediately abolished and a republic was established. On January 21st 1793, Louis was sent to the scaffold. To the war on Austria, already raging, was added a war on England. Then came the reign of terror, during which radicals in possession of the convention executed a large number of counter-revolutionists and those suspected of sympathy with the monarchy. They shot down peasants who rose in insurrection against their rule and established a relentless dictatorship. Civil war followed. Terrible atrocities were committed on both sides in the name of liberty and in the name of monarchy. To Americans of conservative temper it now seemed that the revolution, so auspiciously begun, had degenerated into anarchy and mere bloodthirsty strife. Burke summons the world to war on France. In England, Edmund Burke led the fight against the new French principles which he feared might spread to all Europe. In his Reflections on the French Revolution written in 1790, he attacked with terrible wrath the whole program of popular government. He called for war, relentless war, upon the French as monsters and outlaws. He demanded that they be reduced to order by the restoration of the king to the full power under the protection of the arms of European nations. Paine's defense of the French Revolution. To counteract the campaign of hate against the French, Thomas Paine replied to Burke in another of his famous tracks, The Rights of Man, which was given to the American public in an edition containing a letter of approval from Jefferson. Burke, said Paine, had been mourning about the glories of the French monarchy and aristocracy, but had forgotten the starving peasants and oppressed people, had wept over the plumage and neglected the dying bird. Burke had denied the right of the French people to choose their own governors, blandly forgetting that the English government in which he saw a final perfection itself rested on two revolutions. He had boasted that the King of England held his crown in contempt of democratic societies.  To the charge that the doctrines of the Rights of Man were newfangled, Paine replied that the question was not whether they were new or old, but whether they were right or wrong. As to the French disorders and difficulties, he bade the world wait to see what would be brought forth in due time. The effect of the French Revolution on American politics. The course of the French Revolution and the controversies accompanying it exercised a profound influence on the formation of the first political parties in America. The followers of Hamilton, now proud of the name Federalists, drew back in fright as they heard of the cruel deeds committed during the reign of terror. They turned savagely upon the revolutionists and their friends in America, denouncing as Jacobin everybody who did not condemn loudly enough the proceedings of the French Republic. A Massachusetts preacher roundly assailed the atheistical, anarchical, and in other respects immoral principles of the French Republicans. He then proceeded with equal passion to attack Jefferson and the anti-Federalists, whom he charged with spreading false French propaganda and betraying America. The editors, patrons, and abetters of these vehicles of slander, he exclaimed, ought to be considered and treated as enemies to their country. Of all traitors, they are the most aggravatedly criminal. Of all villains, they are the most infamous and detestable. The anti-Federalists, as a matter of fact, were generally favorable to the revolution, although they deplored many of the events associated with it. Paine's pamphlet, endorsed by Jefferson, was widely read. Democratic societies, after the fashion of French political clubs, arose in the cities. The coalition of European monarchs against France was denounced as a coalition against the very principles of republicanism, and the execution of Louis the 16th was openly celebrated at a banquet in Philadelphia. Harmless titles, such as Sir, The Honorable, and His Excellency, were decried as aristocratic, and some of the more excited insisted on adopting the French title Citizen, speaking, for example, of Citizen Judge and Citizen Toastmaster. Pamphlets in defense of the French streamed from the press, while subsidized newspapers kept the propaganda in full swing. The European War Disturbs American Commerce This battle of wits, or rather contest in Calumny, might have gone on indefinitely in America without producing any serious results, had it not been for the war between England and France, then raging. The English claimed the right to seize American produce bound for French ports and to confiscate American ships engaged in carrying French goods. Adding fuel to a fire not already hot enough, they began to search American ships and to carry off British-born sailors found on board American vessels. The French Appeal for Help At the same time the French Republic turned to the United States for aid in its war on England and sent over as its diplomatic representative, Citizen Gennet, an ardent supporter of the new order. On his arrival at Charleston he was greeted with fervor by the anti-Federalists. As he made his way north he was wind and dined and given popular ovations that turned his head. He thought the whole country was ready to join the French Republic in its contest with England. Gennet therefore attempted to use the American ports as the base of operations for French privateers preying on British merchant ships, and he insisted that the United States was, in honor, bound to help France under the Treaty of 1778. The Proclamation of Neutrality and the Jay Treaty Unmoved by the rising tide of popular sympathy for France, Washington took a firm course. He received Gennet coldly. The demand that the United States aid France under the old Treaty of Alliance he answered by proclaiming the neutrality of America and warning American citizens against hostile acts toward either France or England. When Gennet continued to hold meetings, issue manifestos, and stir up the people against England, Washington asked the French government to recall him. This act he followed up by sending the Chief Justice, John Jay, on a Pacific mission to England. The result was the celebrated Jay Treaty of 1794. By its terms, Great Britain agreed to withdraw her troops from the Western forts where they had been since the War for Independence and to grant certain slight trade concessions. The Chief Sources of Bitterness, the failure of the British to return slaves carried off during the Revolution, the seizure of American ships, and the imprisonment of sailors were not touched much to the distress of everybody in America, including loyal Federalists. Nevertheless, Washington, dreading an armed conflict with England, urged the Senate to ratify the treaty. The weight of his influence carried the day. At this, the hostility of the anti-Federalists knew no bounds. Jefferson declared the Jay Treaty an infamous act which is really nothing more than an alliance between England and the Anglo-men of this country against the legislature and the people of the United States. Hamilton, defending it with his usual courage, was stoned by a mob in New York and driven from the platform with blood streaming from his face. Jay was burned in effigy. Even Washington was not spared. The House of Representatives was openly hostile. To display its feelings, it called upon the President for the papers relative to the treaty negotiations only to be more highly incensed by his flat refusal to present them on the ground that the House did not share in the treaty making power. Washington Retires from Politics Such angry contests confirmed the President in his slowly maturing determination to retire at the end of his second term in office. He did not believe that a third term was unconstitutional or improper, but worn out by his long and arduous labors in war and in peace and wounded by harsh attacks from former friends, he longed for the quiet of his beautiful estate at Mount Vernon. In September 1796, on the eve of the presidential election, Washington issued his farewell address, another state paper to be treasured and read by generations of Americans to come. In this address, he directed the attention of the people to three subjects of lasting interest. He warned them against sectional jealousies. He remonstrated against the spirit of partisanship, saying that in government of the popular character, in government purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. He likewise cautioned the people against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, saying, Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none or very remote relation. Hence, she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it would be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations and collusions of her friendships or enmities. Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world, taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies. The campaign of 1796, Adams elected. On hearing of the retirement of Washington, the anti-Federalists cast off all restraints in honor of France and in opposition to what they were pleased to call the monarchical tendencies of the Federalists. They boldly assumed the name Republican. The term Democrat then applied only to obscure and despised radicals had not come into general use. They selected Jefferson as their candidate for president against John Adams, the Federalist nominee, and carried on such a spirited campaign that they came within four votes of electing him. The successful candidate, Adams, was not fitted by training or opinion for conciliating a determined opposition. He was a reserved and studious man. He was neither a good speaker nor a skillful negotiator. In one of his books, he had declared himself in favor of government by an aristocracy of talents and wealth, an offense which the Republicans never forgave. While John Marshall found him a sensible, plain, candid, good-tempered man, Jefferson could see in him nothing but a monocrat and Anglo man. Had it not been for the conduct of the French government, Adams would hardly have enjoyed a moment's genuine popularity during his administration. The Quarrel with France The French Directory, an executive department established under the Constitution of 1795, managed, however, to stir the anger of Republicans and Federalists alike. It regarded the Jay Treaty as a rebuke to France and a flagrant violation of obligations solemnly registered in the Treaty of 1778. Accordingly, it refused to receive an American minister, treated him in a humiliating way, and finally told him to leave the country. Overlooking this affront in his anxiety to maintain peace, Adams dispatched to France a commission of eminent men with instructions to reach an understanding with the French Republic. On their arrival, they were chagrined to find, instead of a decent reception, an indirect demand for an apology respecting the past conduct of the American government, a payment in cash, and an annual tribute as the price of continued friendship. When the news of this affair reached President Adams, he promptly laid it before Congress, referring to the Frenchmen who had made the demands as Mr. X, Mr. Y, and Mr. Z. This insult coupled with the fact that French privateers, like the British, were preying upon American commerce, enraged even the Republicans who had been loudest in the profession of their French sympathies. They forgot their wrath over the Jay Treaty and joined with the Federalists in shouting, millions for defense, not a cent for tribute. Preparations for war were made on every hand. Washington was once more called for Mount Vernon to take his old position at the head of the army. Indeed, fighting actually began upon the high seas and went on without a formal declaration of war until the year 1800. By that time the directory had been overthrown. A treaty was readily made with Napoleon, the first consul, who was beginning his remarkable career as Chief of the French Republic, soon to be turned into an empire. Alien and Sedition Laws Flushed with success, the Federalists determined, if possible, to put an end to radical French influence in America and to silence Republican opposition. They therefore passed two drastic laws in the summer of 1798, the Alien and Sedition Acts. The first of these measures empowered the President to expel from the country or to imprison any alien whom he regarded as dangerous or had reasonable grounds to suspect of any treasonable or secret machinations against the government. The second of the measures, the Sedition Act, penalized not only those who attempted to stir up unlawful combinations against the government, but also everyone who wrote, uttered, or published any false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States or either House of Congress or the President of the United States with the intent to defame said government or to bring them or either of them into contempt or disrepute. This measure was hurried through Congress in spite of the opposition and the clear provision in the Constitution that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. Even many Federalists feared the consequences of this action. Hamilton was alarmed when he read the Bill, exclaiming, let us not establish a tyranny. Energy is a very different thing from violence. John Marshall told his friends in Virginia that, had he been in Congress, he would have opposed the two bills because he thought them useless and calculated to create unnecessary discontents and jealousies. The Alien Law was not enforced, but it gave great offense to the Irish and French whose activities against the American government's policy respecting Great Britain put them in danger of prison. This addition law, on the other hand, was vigorously applied. Several editors of Republican newspapers soon found themselves in jail or broken by ruinous fines for their caustic criticisms of the Federalist President and his policies. Bystanders at political meetings who uttered sentiments which, though ungenerous and severe, seemed harmless enough now were hurried before Federalist judges and promptly fined and imprisoned. Although the prosecutions were not numerous, they aroused a keen resentment. The Republicans were convinced that their political opponents, having saddled upon the country Hamilton's fiscal system and the British Treaty, were bent on silencing all censure. The measures therefore had exactly the opposite effect from that which their authors intended. Instead of helping the Federalist Party, they made criticism of it more bitter than ever. The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. Jefferson was quick to take advantage of the discontent. He drafted a set of resolutions declaring the sedition law in null and void as violating the Federal Constitution. His resolutions were passed by the Kentucky legislature late in 1798, signed by the Governor, and transmitted to the other states for their consideration. Though receiving unfavorable replies from a number of Northern states, Kentucky the following year reaffirmed its position and declared that the nullification of all unconstitutional acts of Congress was the rightful remedy to be used by the states in the redress of grievances. It thus defied the Federal Government and announced a doctrine hostile to nationality and fraught with terrible meaning for the future. In the neighboring state of Virginia, Madison led a movement against the alien and sedition laws. He induced the legislature to pass resolutions condemning the acts as unconstitutional and calling upon the other states to take proper means to preserve their rights and the rights of the people. The Republican Triumph in 1800. Thus was the way prepared for the election of 1800. The Republicans left no stone unturned in their efforts to place on the Federalist candidate, President Adams, the odium of the alien and sedition laws, in addition to responsibility for approving Hamilton's measures and policies. The Federalists, divided in councils and cold in their affection for Adams, made a poor campaign. They tried to discredit their opponents with epithets of Jacobins and anarchists, terms which had been weakened by excessive use. When the vote was counted, it was found that Adams had been defeated, while the Republicans had carried the entire South and New York also, and secured eight of the fifteen electoral votes cast by Pennsylvania. Our beloved Adams will now close his bright career, lamented a Federalist newspaper. Sons of faction, demagogues, and high priests of anarchy, now you have caused a triumph. Jefferson's election, however, was still uncertain. By a curious provision in the Constitution, Presidential electors were required to vote for two persons without indicating which office each was to fill, the one receiving the highest number of votes to be President, and the candidate standing next to be Vice President. It so happened that Aaron Burr, the Republican candidate for Vice President, had received the same number of votes as Jefferson. As neither had a majority, the election was thrown into the House of Representatives, where the Federalists held the balance of power. Although it was well known that Burr was not even a candidate for President, his friends and many Federalists began intriguing for his election to that high office. Had it not been for the vigorous action of Hamilton, the prize might have been snatched out of Jefferson's hands. Not until the 36th ballot on February 17th, 1801, was the great issue decided in his favor.