IHBI
nflB^B
flHHRBH
ill •' R
BHHHpSM^^H
•
j:;r(.!, , v i
I
to
of
mterstt of Toronto
Professor C.D.Rouillard
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE
UNITED STATES
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
NEW YORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO • DALLAS
ATLANTA • SAN FRANCISCO
MACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED
LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA
MELBOURNE
THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.
TORONTO
A SHORT HISTORY OF
THE UNITED STATES
BY
JOHN SPENCER BASSETT, PH.D.
PROFESSOR OF AMERICAN HISTORY IN
SMITH COLLEGE
gorfc
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1917
All rights reserved
E
COPYEIGHT, 1913,
BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
Set up and electrotyped. Published September, 1913.
Reprinted October, igi3 ; February, 1914; January, 1915;
August, October, November, 1916 ; July, December, 1917.
118800
NorfaooU
J. 8. Cashing Co. — Berwick & Smith Co.
Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.
PREFACE
IN this book I have sought to tell clearly and impartially the story
of human achievement in what is now the United States, from the
earliest traces of man's existence to the present time. Out of the
multitude of facts which may be considered within the domain of
American history, those have been recounted which seem best suited
to explain the progress of the people as a nation. The influence of
physical environment has been discussed in the opening chapter,
which also deals with the primitive inhabitants. An attempt has been
made to give the colonial period its proper unity and show in what
manner the colonies were a part of the general British scheme of im-
perial government. At the same time one must remember that it is
American and not British history which concerns us, and for that
reason the narrative must not neglect the individual colonies. From
the end of the colonial period the dominant interest is the progress of
events which have to do with the common cause of independence, and
after that with national development.
Much thought has been given to the proper distribution of em-
phasis between the various historical factors. Political institutions
are the most conscious expression of the national will. They
determine the form of the story which the historian has to tell. Bur
social and economic conditions and the actions of leading men give
color and contour to the figure and decide whether it be attractive or
unattractive, vivid or unimpressive. This volume contains at inter-
vals summaries of the habits and social progress of the people, while
throughout it seeks to present the decisions of congress and adminis-
trations in the matters which relate to the most important phases of
popular welfare. It is believed that, if well done, it thus becomes in
the most vital sense a social history. My aim has been to lay the
necessary foundation for those who wish to pursue further the subject
of American history in whatever phase they may be interested.
In a work like this it is impossible to discuss new historical evi-
dence. I have had to content myself with what has already been done
by patient and faithful investigators. I have drawn from the results
of their labors freely and gratefully. It has also been necessary to
omit many things which I should have desired to include had greater
space been allowed by the plan to which the book must conform. It
seemed best to deal only with the main currents of history, and to
follow these with considerable fullness rather than encumber the narra-
tive with many details. If some of my readers are disappointed
vi PREFACE
through the omission of something they expected to find, I hope they
will be consoled by finding that what has been attempted has gained
in amplitude of treatment.
The bibliographies at the ends of chapters are intended as an aid
to those who wish to read further than this book can carry them.
They are classified with respect to subjects, and while they are not
critical, no book has been mentioned which does not contain useful
information, although some of them must be perused with discrimina-
tion. It is suggested that the investigator suppplement the informa-
tion herein offered by consulting Larned, The Literature of American
History (1902), Hart, editor, The American Nation, 27 vols. (1904-
1908), as well as special bibliographies. The books mentioned under
the caption, For Independent Reading, are popular rather than scien-
tific, but they generally contain reliable information. It is hoped that
they may be of value to students who wish to read American history
during vacations and to others who read through their own initiative.
Finally, the author's thanks are due to Professor Marshall S. Brown
of New York University, who kindly read and criticised the completed
manuscript, but who is in no way responsible for the errors herein
contained.
J. S. B.
1 6 RUE CHALGRIN, PARIS,
CONTENTS
CHAPTER I. THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS:
Physical Factors in American History 1
Natural Resources 4
Early Inhabitants 11
The Indians 13
Indian Culture 15
CHAPTER II. THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA:
Events and Ideas leading to the Discovery
The Achievement of Columbus
Exploring the Coasts of the New World
Exploring the Interior
CHAPTER III. THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
The Gentlemen Adventurers
The Beginning of Virginia
Better Times in the Colony
The Settlement of Maryland
CHAPTER IV. THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND:
The Plymouth Colony
The Massachusetts Bay Colony
The Settlement of Other New England Colonies .
New York under the Dutch
Early Relations of the Colonies with England .
23
27
31
37
41
45
50
52
59
63
68
72
76
CHAPTER V. COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER THE LATER STUARTS, 1660-1689 :
Charles II and the Colonies 80
The Stuart Reaction * 88
The Colonies under the Later Stuarts, 1660-1689 92
CHAPTER VI. COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT, 1690-1763 :
Development of the Colonial Conflict 99
Typical Colonial Controversies 101
Georgia Founded 109
Growth of New France Ill
The French and Indian Wars 115
The Last Conflict between the French and English in North America . 121
vii
viii CONTENTS
CHAPTER VII. SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES :
The Conditions of Settlement 134
Laboring Classes 137
Colonial Industry . 140
Trade 142
Race Elements in Colony Planting 145
Religion in the Colonies 148
Education and Culture in the Colonies 153
Local Government in the Colonies 155
Paper Money in the Colonies 157
CHAPTER VIII. THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION :
The Principles at Stake 161
Grenville's Policy 162
Growing Irritation . 169
Continental Organization and Attempts at Adjustment .... 176
CHAPTER IX. THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION :
The Declaration of Independence 186
The Campaign around New York, 1776 188
The Campaigns of 1777, Philadelphia and Saratoga . . . .192
The Alliance with France . . . 198
Minor Events in the North, 1778-1782 200
The War in the West 203
The Navy in the Revolution 204
The Campaign in the South, 1778-1781 206
The Treaty of Peace , . . 214
Civil Progress during the Revolution 217
CHAPTER X. THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
Financial Embarrassments 222
Industry and Trade after the War 225
' ' Forming a New Society . • 228
The Western Lands 231
Popular Dissatisfaction 235
CHAPTER XI. MAKING THE CONSTITUTION :
The Articles of Confederation 238
Moving toward a Stronger Union 240
The Adoption of the Constitution 247
Nationality and State Integrity in the Constitution .... 250
CONTENTS
IX
CHAPTER XII. WASHINGTON'S PRESIDENCY — A PERIOD OF ORGANIZA-
TION:
The Work of Organization 256
Financial Reorganization 259
Adjusting Foreign Relations 261
The United States and the European War 266
The Whisky Insurrection 267
Political Development under Washington 269
CHAPTER XIII. ADAMS AND THE DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS:
The Political Character of the Administration 276
The Quarrel with France 278
Overconfidence of the Federalists 283
Overthrow of the Federalists 287
CHAPTER XIV. INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS UNDER
JEFFERSON AND MADISON :
Republican Reforms . . * 291
The War with Tripoli » . . .295
The Purchase of Louisiana 296
Dissension in the Republican Party 300
The Schemes of Aaron Burr 303
Relations between England and the United States . . . .306
Jefferson's Reply to Europe 309
CHAPTER XV. THE WAR OF 1812:
Origin of the War 313
The Struggle for Canada 321
Operations at Sea 326
The British Campaign on Chesapeake Bay 329
The War on the Gulf Coast 331
New England Discontent 335
CHAPTER XVI. SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT:
Growth of the West and Southwest 341
Industrial Development • 345
Slavery made Sectional 350
Religious Development after the Revolution 352
Exploration in the Far West 355
Early Constitutional Interpretation 357
CHAPTER XVII. THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA PRESIDENTS :
Reforms of 1816-1817 ... 363
Party Cleavage under Monroe . 367
x CONTENTS
PAGE
The Acquisition of Florida , 368
The Missouri Compromise 371
The Monroe Doctrine 375
The Election of 1824 377
The Presidential Election of 1825 379
CHAPTER XVIII. THE ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS:
Party Formation under John Quincy Adams 382
The Tariff and the Development of Sectionalism 384
The Election of 1828 388
CHAPTER XIX. PROBLEMS OF JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION :
The New President in Charge 392
Internal Improvements Checker 394
Division in the Jacksonian Party 396
The Election of 1832 403
CHAPTER XX. JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED:
The End of Nullification . . . . . . . . . . 407
Jackson's " War " against the Bank 411
Foreign Affairs . . . 415
The End of Jackson's Presidency 422
CHAPTER XXI. EARLY PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY, 1831-
1850:
The Antislavery Agitation 428
Van Buren's Presidency 432
The Administration of Tyler 435
The Maine Boundary and the Webster- Ashburton Treaty . . . 437
The Annexation of Texas and the Occupation of Oregon . . . 438
The Election of 1844 441
Folk's Administration 445
The Slavery Question in a New Form 450
The Compromise of 1850 454
CHAPTER XXII. SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, 1815-1861 :
Growth of Population and the Results . 461
The Influence of Great Inventions 463
The Indians . . . . 465
Social Development in the South 468
The Development of Democracy in State and Nation .... 472
The Progress of Education 476
Gold in California 480
The Panic of 1857 . 482
CONTENTS
CHAPTER XXIII. EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
Overthrowing the Compromise of 1850
The Struggle for Kansas
A New Party and the Election of 1856
The Dred Scott Decision
The Lincoln-Douglas Debates
The John Brown Raid
The Election of 1860
CHAPTER XXIV. THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR:
War or Peace ? .
Lincoln and Secession
Preparations for War
The Bull Run Campaign
Relations with Great Britain .
CHAPTER XXV. THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS :
A Bifurcated Invasion .
Three Preliminary Operations, 1861 ......
Grant's Campaign on the Tennessee, 1862
Confederate Counter- Movement in Tennessee and Kentucky
Vicksburg Captured
The Campaign for Chattanooga
The Campaign against Atlanta .
Sherman's March through Georgia and the Carolinas .
The War beyond the Mississippi
CHAPTER XXVI. THE WAR IN THE EAST, 1862-1865 :
McClellan's Peninsular Campaign ....
Pope and Second Bull Run
The Campaign of Antietam
The Battle of Fredericksburg
The Battle of Chancellorsville ....
The Gettysburg Campaign
From the Wilderness to Petersburg
The End of the War
Federal Naval Operations
CHAPTER XXVII. CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR:
Enlisting Troops, North and South
Federal Finances
The Progress of Emancipation ....
Political Parties during the Civil War .
The War Powers of the President ....
The Southern Problem and Southern Efforts
485
489
493
497
499
502
504
511
514
516
518
521
526
526
527
529
530
532
535
539
541
545
550
553
555
557
558
563
564
569
572
574
577
581
585
586
xii CONTENTS
CHAPTER XXVIII. RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE:
Two Possible Methods of Reconstruction 594
Lincoln's Plan of Reconstruction 596
Johnson's Plan of Reconstruction 599
Affairs in the South 601
Johnson's Hopes 604
The Fourteenth Amendment 607
The Reconstruction Acts of 1867 609
An Appeal to the Supreme Court 611
The Impeachment of President Johnson 613
CHAPTER XXIX. RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE:
Social Conditions in the South 619
Congressional Reconstruction in Operation 622
The Ku Klux Klan 627
Triumph of the Southern Democrats . . . . . . . 630
National Reconstruction under Grant 633
Interpreting the War Amendments 635
CHAPTER XXX. PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877:
Political Conditions after the War 640
The Election of 1868 641
Foreign Affairs under Johnson 643
Grant's Political Mistakes 644
The Presidential Campaign of 1872 648
Political Decay under Grant . 649
The Election of 1876 .652
CHAPTER XXXI. ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877:
Financial Reorganization 660
The Legal Tender Decisions . . 663
Industrial Progress 664
Resumption of Specie Payment 668
Diplomatic Affairs under Grant 669
CHAPTER XXXII. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST:
The Rocky Mountain Region 676
The Transcontinental Railroads 680
Indian Wars 683
The Sioux War of 1876 687
A New Indian Policy 690
CHAPTER XXXIII. POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT, 1877-1881 :
Hayes and his Party -. 693
Course of the Democrats 695
CONTENTS xiii
PAGE
The Bland-Allison Silver Coinage Law 697
Resumption of Specie Payment . 699
The Election of 1880 701
Garfield's Short Presidency 703
CHAPTER XXXIV. POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM, 1881-1897:
Civil Service Reform 707
Ballot Reform , .... 711
Tariff Reform 712
The Election of 1884 716
Cleveland and his Party 719
Tariff Reform under Cleveland 721
The Republican Party in a New Stage 723
The McKinley Tariff and the Surplus 724
The Tariff Legislation of 1892-1897 727
CHAPTER XXXV. GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS:
Combinations as Historical Factors 731
Railroad Combinations 732
Trusts 736
Bank Consolidation 740
Combinations of Laborers 741
CHAPTER XXXVI. LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT:
The Bland Law in Operation 746
The Last Years of Harrison . 748
Cleveland and the Panic of 1893 753
Selling Bonds to protect the Surplus 755
The Bryan Campaign for Free Silver, 1896 758
CHAPTER XXXVII. A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY:
Importance of the Pacific 764
The Samoan Incident, 1887-1889 765
The Fur Seal Controversy 767
The Mafia Incident . .767
Relations with Chile 768
Hawaiian Annexation 771
Chinese Immigration 774
America and Japan 775
The Venezuela Boundary Dispute 777
xiv CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER XXXVIII. THE WAR WITH SPAIN:
Spain and Cuba . 782
American Intervention 786
The Work of the Navy 790
Land Operations against Santiago 795
The Destruction of the Spanish Squadron 799
Reflections on the War in Cuba 802
Peace Negotiations 805
Subsequent Relations with Cuba 806
CHAPTER XXXIX. EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS :
The Philippines as an American Colony 809
An American Colonial Policy 813
An Isthmian Canal 814
The Canal at Panama 817
Canal Construction 821
American Diplomacy in the Orient 822
The Alaskan Boundary 825
The New Monroe Doctrine 826
CHAPTER XL. THE ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT:
Roosevelt's Corporation Policy 829
Roosevelt's Second Term 832
Taft's Administration 837
The Presidential Election of 1912 843
Legislative Progress under Taft 849
FULL-PAGE MAPS
FACING PAGE
Physical Features of the United States ........
Early Explorations ...........
The North during the Revolutionary War .......
The Northwest during the Revolution ........ 202
The Revolutionary War in the South ........ :
The United States at the Close of the Revolution ..... 216
California and Mexico, 1846 .......... 448
The United States during the Civil War .....••
Operations in the East ...........
The Battlefield of Gettysburg ......... 559
The Transportation Problem of the South ....... 574
The Far West ... ......... 678
Territorial Development (doublf page} ........ 792
R20
The Panama Canal ........
MAPS IN THE TEXT
PAGE
Bunker Hill and Boston ........... ;
Campaign around New York .........
Valley Forge, Philadelphia, and Brandywine ...... :
The" Saratoga Campaign .......... 196
The Siege of Yorktown ........... '
The Canadian Border ........... •
Washington and Vicinity .......... 32-
The Erie Canal ............ 36(
The Gulf Region ............ 369
The Vicksburg Campaign ....... • '
Operations around Atlanta .......... 537
The Santiago Campaign . ....... 797
CHAPTER I
THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
PHYSICAL FACTORS IN AMERICAN HISTORY
THE history of the United States, like that of other countries, has
been modified by physical environment. Nature has determined
where man should begin to penetrate the continent, his
routes of communication between the various portions of flj*n^"of
the country, and the resources out of which he has built Nature. °
up the national wealth. Climate has limited achievement,
or aided it, the soil has determined the form of labor, and rainfall has
marked out the area he inhabits. In some respects he has overcome
natural conditions, but in most things he has had to conform his ac-
tions to them. Speaking generally, nature has been favorable to man
in the United States. Says Shaler: "There is no area, in either of
the Americas, or for that matter in the world outside of Europe, where
it would have been possible to plant English colonies, that would have
been found so suitable for the purpose."
The area of the United States, exclusive of Alaska and the island
possessions, is 3,026,789 square miles, which is less than that of Europe
by 725,000 square miles. Great irregularities mark the
coast line of Europe and facilitate political subdivision. !Effe<:*s ?f.
s\ A T • i „ • r ,1 Territorial
Our own coast line is relatively regular, and most of the unity.
interior is one vast river system. The Appalachian Moun-
tains are not a formidable barrier between the coastal plain and the
interior, since they are easily penetrated in Pennsylvania and fall
away entirely in Georgia and New York. The Rockies are much
higher, but they were not reached before the day of railroads, and
through means of this invention most of their difficulties disappeared.
It has therefore happened that the people from the Atlantic to the
Pacific constitute one nation. They are relieved of the burdens which
opposing interests lay upon the powers of Europe, and the size of the
country has given it great influence in international affairs.
Through this extent of territory there is a wide range of climate,
but the mean temperature is mild. The fact that a great plain extends
from the Gulf of Mexico to the Arctic Ocean without the
interruption of a mountain chain accounts for a wide varia- variations,
tion in temperature for a given point. Through this means
mighty currents of heated atmosphere are carried far northward in
2 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
summer and cold waves come far southward in winter. As a result,
Arkansas, for example, has the winter climate of Edinburgh and the
summer climate of Spain, while Minnesota has summers like those of
Venice and winters as cold as those of Scotland. The Pacific coast,
protected from the disturbing force of the currents in the interior of
the continent, has a more stable climate ; but the Appalachians are
not high enough to shield in a similar way the Atlantic coast.
In all parts of the United States there is adequate rainfall except
near the Rocky Mountains. An area beginning with the eastern slope
Rainfall °^ tn*s ran&e an<^ extending westward to the Sierra Nevada
range is deficient in this respect. A large part of it yields
grass for ranches, but one fourth of it is entirely arid and makes a
great desert with no vegetation except alkali plants and prickly
shrubs. Much of this general region may be reclaimed by irrigation,
and in 1902 Congress provided means of reclamation which will even-
tually bring these parts within the area of fertile production. Two
ocean currents modify the climate of the United States. The Gulf
Stream on the east exerts an influence on the coast as far north as
Cape Hatteras; and the Japanese Current, sweeping down from
Alaska, where its effects are marked, tempers the winters of all the
Pacific slope north of Mexico.
Means of water transportation are adequate. Harbors are nu-
merous on the Atlantic coast, and rivers suitable for the ships of the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries are so well distributed
Draina*1 enti° th.at if a line were drawn from Maine to Florida parallel
System^6 witn the coast and one hundred miles inland, there would
hardly be a spot east of it which was more than a day's
journey from water transportation. This rim of coast received the
first colonies, and its natural advantages made easy the introduction
of civilization. The plain west of it is traversed by several large rivers
which by offering means of communication and an abundance of
fertile bottom land marked out the lines of advance for future settle-
ments. This took the frontier to the Alleghanies, to pass
The Passage whicn three easy routes might be followed ; one around the
Misstesi i northern end of the range to the lakes, another around the
Basin. southern end, and another through central Pennsylvania to
the upper waters of the Ohio. The Iroquois Indians held
back immigration by the northern passage for many years, and the
Creeks and Cherokees did the same on the south, so that the first
English advance across the barrier was by way of the central route.
The Mississippi basin, as the central portion of the continent is
called, is entered from the sea by three great systems of
Water* water communication. One comes from the north by the
Courses. St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes and gives access to
the very heart of the central north. Another is the Missis-
sippi and its tributaries. Its northeastern branches approach within
MEANS OF COMMUNICATION 3
short distances of the streams which flow into the lakes of the north,
and its western and northwestern tributaries penetrate the broad
western plains. A third system is the Alabama, which reaches the
sea through Mobile bay. Smaller than either of the others, it never-
theless covers a large and important region north of the Gulf of Mexico.
The currents of most of these rivers make it difficult for sailboats to
come upstream, and the earliest transportation was by flatboat down
the river; but the invention of steamboats in 1807 put the navigable
rivers of the country entirely under human control.
The Pacific slope differs from the Atlantic slope in both harbors and
waterways. Only four of the former are important : Puget Sound,
San Francisco, San Diego, and the mouth of the Columbia
river, which is dangerous. The mountains approach so Harbors and
near to the sea that the coastal plain is too narrow for large thJ^acffic
streams ; but in Oregon and southern California they recede coast,
enough to allow the exit of two great rivers which gather
their waters in the high grounds of the interior. One of these is the
Columbia, which flows through a fertile and well-timbered valley, the
home of a numerous people ; the other is the Colorado, whose course
is twisted through an arid region, which can only hope for develop-
ment through irrigation.
Certain physical features have materially aided in the construction
of artificial means of communication. After roads, which with their
bridges were early made by the settlers to facilitate travel, Canals
canals were next undertaken, usually in order to reach the
interior beyond the heads of navigation of the rivers. They generally
paralleled small streams whose shallowness made them unfit for navi-
gation. Philadelphia interests, seeking to reach the rich western
trade which had its gateway at Pittsburg, planned a canal over the
mountains. Starting from Harrisburg it followed the Juniata river
to the base of the Alleghanies, where it was forced to stop. On the
other side of the range it was resumed along the banks of
the Conemaugh and Alleghany rivers to Pittsburg. The bufe ^J^e
ridge between these two links has an elevation of 2491 feet
and a width of forty- two miles. Uncompromising advocates of canals
proposed a tunnel throughout the whole distance, but a railroad was
built instead. There were other attempts to reach Pittsburg from
the coast, but the line just mentioned was the most continuous water
route that was utilized. Its disadvantages were many, and it was
used chiefly for freight, passengers preferring the quicker journey over
one of the several post roads to the upper Ohio.
When Pennsylvanians developed this line of transportation they
had their eyes on a competing system in New York. From the Hudson
at Albany to Buffalo is only three hundred and sixty- three miles.
Much of the distance is traversed by the Mohawk river, and the
highest elevation is only four hundred and forty-five feet above sea
4 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
level. To the north are the Adirondacks and to the south the
Catskills. The valley is nature's gateway to the West, and as
early as 1785 plans were considered for a canal through
it:> In l825 they Came t0 fruition when the Erie Canal
Route. was completed from Buffalo, on Lake Erie, to Albany,
on the Hudson. It had two branches, one to Lake
Champlain on the north and the other to Lake Ontario, at Oswego.
It conducted the commerce of a large area to the port of New York.
The results were striking. In 1826 nineteen thousand boats and
rafts were carried down these New York canals to the Hudson. Ship-
building sprang up on Lake Champlain, Buffalo became a
Canai'con dePot for tne furs and otner products of the Northwest
stmction. which formerly found outside markets by way of the St.
Lawrence, and the settlement of the lands south of the
Great Lakes was given a great stimulus. In 1825 the freight rate
from Buffalo to Albany was eighty-eight dollars a ton: twenty-six
years later it was less than six dollars. The lake region was thus made
tributary to New York, and out of this fact grew the industrial su-
premacy of that city. Up to this time Philadelphia was the leading
American city : it fought hard to retain its supremacy, and its control
of the best road to Pittsburg was an important factor ; but access to
the lake region was worth more in the future development of the coun-
try than reaching the Ohio valley. When railroads were invented
these two passes were still of great importance. One line followed
the Juniata to Pittsburg, and two were built across the level Mohawk
plain to Buffalo, where the lack of steep grades makes operating ex-
penses relatively low.
NATURAL RESOURCES
Natural resources have affected the history of the United States as
much as means of communication. No colony could prosper without
something which it could export for the accumulation of
Early im- wealth. For the earliest comers such articles were furs
For* and an<^ ^s^* They were in ready demand in Europe and at-
Fisheries. tracted the attention of hardy adventurers before the New
World was seriously thought of as a place for colonization.
Fur traders and fishermen established temporary stations on the coast
in advance of permanent settlements, and thus called the world's at-
tention to the resources of the continent.
Furs abounded in all parts of America, but they were better in the
colder parts. The earliest traders came into harbors,
Fur Traders usually at the mouths of rivers, where the natives met to
in the In-" barter skins for goods- As tne trade developed they went
terior. up the rivers into the interior, generally establishing trad-
ing houses at the heads of navigation, as at Hartford on
the Connecticut, Albany on the Hudson, and Richmond on the James.
FUR TRADE AND FISHERIES 5
Next, individual traders went out from these centers to remote parts,
gathering the furs from the natives rather than waiting for them to be
brought to the stations. In every case the advent of settlements was
the signal for the disappearance of the trade. To-day when the whole
continent is known to man, furs are found only in the frozen parts of
the north, where the climate forbids ordinary pursuits. In the in-
terior, as well as on the coast, the fur trader marched in advance of
the frontier. He explored unknown parts and revealed to the settle-
ments the portions best suited for habitation, he discovered the best
means of penetrating the interior, and he established important re-
lations with the Indians.
Even earlier than the fur trader was the fisherman. The many
indentations of the Atlantic coast abound in mackerel and salmon ;
but more important still was the cod, whose proper habitat
is the coasts of Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. At the
coming of the colonists this fish was found as far south as Fisheries,
the cape which now bears its name. It was then already
well known in Europe ; for enterprising fishermen from England and
France were taking it on the banks of Newfoundland many years
earlier. "The knob headed, richly fat, and succulent codfish," as
Weeden calls it, is probably the most popular of our food fishes. Its
special advantage is its excellent keeping quality when salted and
dried. With mackerel it was widely sold in the Catholic countries
of western Europe, where fish was demanded for use on Fridays. The
poorer cod and mackerel were sent to the West Indies, where planters
bought them for their slaves. The New England fisheries developed
rapidly from the first and became the basis of an important foreign
trade.
Taking the cod supported an important sea-going population. The
eastern towns of Massachusetts — Boston, Gloucester, Marblehead,
Salem, Ipswich — were the centers of the industry. With
the establishment of fishing on the coast the cod disap- JJ£^e[h°ef
peared in that region ; but the New Eriglander followed it cod.
north as far as the Newfoundland banks. A ship of fifty
tons and a crew of seven were considered adequate for the business ;
and if fishing were good, they might expect to take six hundred quintals
a year. The men served for shares, and the owner of the boat got a
share for his capital. A ship's company was selected for steadiness,
agility of mind and body, and companionable qualities. The associa-
tion was apt to be renewed from season to season, and it promoted
the development of reliable and efficient cooperation. The fisheries
bred sailors for the merchant marine and later for the navy. With
the advance of the eighteenth century capital played a relatively larger
part in the cod fisheries; larger ships were used, and wealthy Whaling
men who furnished outfits became a chief factor in the in-
dustry. Out of this form of fishing grew whaling, which the hardy
6 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
New Englanders carried to the North, and South, Atlantic, and
finally to Pacific waters. The trade in cod and mackerel had the pe-
culiar advantage that it brought specie into the colonies at an early
day, when it was much needed.
Another important resource in the United States is lumber. Forests
originally covered the entire Atlantic coast and all of the Mississippi
basin but the prairies, which occurred in restricted areas north of the
Ohio and in a large territory from the Rocky Mountains to a line some-
what west of the Mississippi. The Pacific coast itself is
Lumber ^ we^ wo°ded, but the rainless region from the Sierras to-the
Rockies is largely without forests. The settlers attacked
the forests with avidity. Masts for all the shipbuilding countries of
Europe, staves and lumber for the treeless West Indies, and naval
stores from the Carolina pines were some of the first forest products.
As the frontier was extended inward from the coast lumbering as-
sumed better organized forms, saw mills lined the rivers, and forest
products became of greater importance. From lumbering the col-
onists quickly proceeded to shipbuilding, making excellent vessels for
their own use and after a while for sale in Europe and the West Indies.
As the frontier proceeded westward the attacks on the forests became
most profligate. Thus a large part of the timber of the country was
wastefully consumed before the people came to realize the importance
of preserving it.
In fertility the soil of the United States compares favorably with
that of Europe. It is peculiarly rich in limestone, which is favorable
to the growth of grain and grass. A large proportion of
the land is tillable, and even the mountain ranges of the
Atlantic slope may be brought largely into cultivation through suffi-
cient effort. There are few great swamps, the Dismal in North Caro-
lina and the Everglades in southern Florida being the only consider-
able ones on the Atlantic coast. The openness of the country made
settlement easy in the early stages, and it has facilitated the extension
of the frontier through the interior.
All the territory north of the Susquehannah and half of that north
of the Ohio was once in the grasp of a great glacier. The effects were:
i, to leave the soil full of stones which must be removed
before it: could be cultivated successfully. This was par-
ticularly true of New England, where, it is estimated, an
average of thirty days' labor was necessary to clear of stones each
acre of land ; 2, Glaciers leave behind them a tough clay soil which
requires years to bring it into profitable production, but
when once subdued it is not easily exhausted. Shaler
asserts that he has never known this kind of soil to be-
come worn out through cultivation. The Indians were
not able to subdue the New England soil, and they were, therefore,
not numerous enough seriously to impede the early attempts at colo-
SOILS AND THEIR PRODUCTS 7
nization. The whites succeeded better, but the difficulty was so great
that agriculture progressed slowly in that region. Many of the people
turned to other forms of industry, especially to trade and, in later years,
to manufactures, for which their excellent water-power was adapted.
This struggle with nature, it is believed, has also stimulated thrift,
self-restraint, and resourcefulness in the inhabitants ; and the estab-
lishment of manufactures has promoted town building. The social
results have been important.
In the South, on the other hand, the tillable soil was fertile, though
more easily exhausted. It was also abundant and cheap, so that the
settlers had a tendency to take up large holdings. To work
these plantations it was necessary to have a permanent s°ut£
labor supply, persons who would not become landowners
themselves in the presence of the unusual opportunity for acquiring
farms. No such laboring class could be had from Europe, but it
could be found in Africa, and the result was negro slavery. Slave
plantations became the rule, and they were so profitable that manu-
facturing was excluded, trade was reduced to simple forms, and the
South was given almost wholly to agriculture.
In the Northwest the prairies were easily and rapidly settled. Im-
migrants quickly became rich farmers. Never was the American
frontier more prosperous and more democratic. Cities T . ...
i ., • 11 i *i i i 11 ii mine wesi.
were built rapidly, and railroads, commerce, and all the
other forms of a complex society were suddenly reared upon the
luxuriant state of agricultural prosperity. In California a favorable
soil and an equable climate have united to support a great fruit raising
industry.
The lands adjacent to rivers have played an important part in the
history of the country, especially on the Atlantic coast and in the
lower Mississippi basin. They were most accessible to the
early inhabitants and had greatest fertility. They were to^Land"
the first lands reduced to cultivation, and when they were
occupied the settlers turned to the tributary streams, where the bottom
lands were less extensive. When the black borders of this drainage
skeleton were taken up and made arable, the higher regions between
them were attacked. The best plantations were the river plantations,
and because their owners were rich, and could afford to own large
tracts, here were found the large plantations. This was somewhat
true of the Connecticut, and essentially true of the Hudson and of all
the Southern rivers.
Raising their own food has never been a problem for Americans,
since all parts of the continent are fertile enough for that,
— and the colonists, once past the initial scarcity due to us
difficulty of adjustment to a new location, had no anxiety
on this score. They were more concerned with having some staple
crop for export which should serve as the basis of wealth. New Eng-
8 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
land could promise little in this respect. Some corn, vegetables, and
beef could be spared from home consumption, but high freights to
Europe forbade sending them thither. The West Indies and the fish-
ing stations of the North offered but a small market, and the middle
colonies were competitors for it. With the increase of transportation
facilities much grain was sent abroad from the latter colonies, the
precursor of a trade which with the development of the West has
become a great factor in our industrial life.
Three staple crops developed in the colonial period; tobacco in
Virginia and Maryland and rice and indigo in South Carolina and
Georgia. Late in the eighteenth century sugar became a
staple in Louisiana. All were profitable and facilitated
the rapid development of the regions in which they were grown.
After the invention of the cotton gin in 1793 cotton became the lead-
ing staple of the country. It was grown throughout the South below
Virginia and Kentucky from the foothills of the Alleghanies to the
Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico. With the development of the coun-
try many other crops have become vastly important. Of them wheat
and corn are of first rank and must be called staples in a large part
of the Mississippi basin.
In the days of settlement Indian corn was a most prevalent food
supply. Besides having excellent nourishing qualities, it was more
Indian Com eas^y cultivated in newly cleared ground than any other
grain. Following the custom of the Indians, the colonist
removed the undergrowth from the forest, killed those trees he did not
care to uproot, and dropped the seed in the spaces between stumps and
dead trunks. European wheat could not have grown or been har-
vested under such conditions. Corn has, also, these other advantages ;
it remains uninjured on the stalk for weeks after it is ripe, it keeps well
in indifferent barns, its grain is excellent food for man and many of the
domesticated animals, and its fodder is good winter forage. More-
over, it grows well in all parts of the country, whereas wheat cannot
be raised with profit in most of the Southern states.
The mineral resources of the United States, which are abundant,
were little exploited before the revolution. In that period men were
satisfied to clear land, build roads, and develop trade,
Deposits, naturally the first tasks to be done in a new country. Our
revolutionary period happened to coincide with one of the
turning points in the world's industrial history. The steam engine,
the blast furnace, and power machinery came into existence at nearly
the same time. Following them came a great demand for coal and the
metals used in ordinary forms of industry, and the rapid
Iron. * development of manufactures in the early part of the nine-
teenth century gave an added impulse to the process. The
mining of coal and iron on a large scale opened the new period. When
these two minerals are found together and close to water transporta-
PHYSICAL FEATURES
OF THE
UNITED STATES
SCALE OF MILES
Over 6,000 feet above Sea Level
Fr,,m 4,000 to 0,000 ft.
From 2,000 to 1,000 /(.
1,000 <o 2,000 ft.
100 200 300 400 500
DISTRIBUTION OF COAL 9
tion they furnish the basis of great industrial activity. They
represent enormous values in themselves, they support a large body
of laborers, and they enter so extensively into modern production
that many manufactories are sure to spring up in the neighborhood.
The result is rich and densely settled areas, numerous cities, and the
various important influences which naturally accompany them.
Most parts of the United States are near coal deposits, but the richest
coal-bearing area is that lying chiefly on the western slope of the Al-
leghanies extending from northern Alabama in the southwest to
southern New York in the North. This belt at the southern part is
about thirty miles broad, but near the northern end it spreads out in
a great bulb reaching from Cumberland, Maryland, to Newark, Ohio.
The deposit in most of the region is bituminous, but in the northeastern
part, near Scranton, Pennsylvania, is a rich anthracite field, an area
of four hundred and seventy-two square miles, which surpasses in
mineral wealth any other region of the same size in the world.
The anthracite coal fields were discovered in 1790 by a hunter whose
strange stories of stones that burned in his campfire attracted atten-
tion. Investigation revealed on the Mauch Chunk a hill of excellent
coal fifty feet high with a surface of forty acres. It was long before
the people came to understand the use of anthracite, or Discovery of
"stone coal." Tradition relates that when it was first Anthracite,
offered for sale in Philadelphia in 1812 purchasers were unable to
burn it and drove the seller out of town for a swindler. Another
story is that an iron manufacturer not long after this tried to use it
in his furnace. All the forenoon he poked at the fire to make it burn,
but had no success. Finally he closed the furnace door in disgust
and went to his dinner. On his return the coal was burning brightly ;
he had left the drafts open, and the accident is supposed to have
revealed the secret of the use of anthracite coal. At any rate, this fuel
has been widely used in America from about 1825.
Most of the Alleghany coal fields are bituminous. The best por-
tion of them is around Pittsburg, where there are, also, good deposits
of iron ore and limestone necessary for iron smelting. Other
rich portions of the general field are in eastern Ohio, West ^ ^^
Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, northern Georgia, and Deposits.
Alabama. Another considerable bituminous coal field is
the Central. It lies in Indiana, Illinois, and western Kentucky, with
sporadic deposits in some of the neighboring states. Its total area is
fifty thousand square miles, and the block coal which it yields is very
satisfactory for furnaces. In the Rocky Mountains are much lignite
and some bituminous coal. On the Pacific coast are moderate deposits
in California, Oregon, and Washington ; and recent investigation has
shown valuable deposits in Alaska.
The coal supply of the United States is greater in proportion to the
national area and more accessible than that of Europe. We have one
io THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
square mile of coal for every ten square miles of surface : Europe has
one for one hundred and eighty-eight. Besides this, our seams are
thicker and nearer the surface. In industrial endurance we are, there-
fore, likely to surpass any other continent, except Asia, where China
has immense beds. These coal beds bring the Orient into the range of
world politics, and are apt to bring our own Pacific coast into close
relations with that part of the world in the future.
Iron ore was worked in most of the colonies before the revolution.
At that time furnaces were fired with charcoal, which was plentifully
iron Works obtained f rom the forests. Most of the enterprises were
small. There were smelting furnaces, bloomeries for the
production of wrought iron, and hammers for making bars ; and the
total output gave the colonists a large part of their iron implements,
and iron in some forms was sent abroad.
Roebuck's invention in 1760, by which coal was used in blast fur-
naces, and the introduction in 1 790 of the steam engine to operate the
blast caused a revolution in iron mining. Charcoal furnaces were dis-
carded, and the iron industry in the United States was confined to the
regions which yielded mineral coal. Western Pennsylvania became
a very important center of the industry, and northern Ohio in the
Cleveland region, where the rich ores from Lake Superior could meet
by water transportation the coal from the Alleghany coal region,
became not only noted for the earlier forms of iron working, but it
became the home of many factories established to produce the articles
in which iron is the chief material. The same thing may be said
of other regions, as West Virginia, eastern Tennessee, and northern
Alabama. The Alleghany and Central coal fields, and the regions
contiguous to them, seem, therefore, to be one of the most important
underlying physical factors of our history, and one which will probably
gain influence in the future.
Coal oils are abundant in the upper Ohio valley and are found in
paying quantities in other regions, as Kansas, Nebraska, and Texas.
Mineral Oil ^n re&i°ns wnere there has been little geological disturbance
they accumulate beneath the surface in great lakes. There
is, also, in the Ohio valley and extending eastward into Virginia, an area
of oil-bearing shale as large as the states of New York and Pennsyl-
vania combined. It is one hundred and fifty feet deep and ten per
cent of it is oil. If satisfactory means can be found to extract this
product, it will become a vast resource when the oil deposits proper are
exhausted.
Gold in lodes is found on the Atlantic coast from Newfoundland to
central Alabama. Before its discovery in California in 1849 it was
G w mined profitably in the southern part of this eastern belt,
but the greater productiveness of the western fields has made
it nearly unprofitable to work the eastern mines. All the Cordilleran
region contains gold, and its discovery in California led to great results.
EARLY MAN IN NORTH AMERICA n
Very rich mines have been opened in Colorado, Idaho, Montana,
Utah, and other neighboring states. The last notable gold area dis-
covered in America is the Klondike fields, opened in 1897. Although
they are in Canadian territory access to them is through Alaska, and
the historical results in that territory have been important. In 1859
two prospectors, Comstock and Jenrode, found a rich silver gilver
region on Mount Davidson, at what is now Virginia City,
Nevada. Rapid developments followed, other regions were discov-
ered, and it was at length seen that in Nevada, Colorado, Arizona,
New Mexico, Utah, Montana, and Wyoming were vast deposits.
This development, with the progress of gold mining, gave a strong
stimulus to the settlement of the mountain region. Railroads were
built, the Indians were pressed back, states were created, and impor-
tant industrial and political consequences followed.
The natural conditions in the United States which most affect
manufactures are factory power and labor supply. In the earliest
times the most important form of the former was water-
power. In New England the coastal plain is narrow and
comparatively precipitous. Here water-power is excel-
lent, and it was utilized long before the revolution. The coming of
steam power lessened New England's advantage in this respect, but
did not remove it entirely. As the coal supplies are reduced, water-
power, whose force is constant, must tend to recover something of its
former superiority. South of New England the coast plain becomes
wider and the rivers have less fall. In the Carolinas the plain is so
level and the evaporation through the long summers so great that
water-powers are not very important, and only on the largest rivers
is there a constant supply throughout the year. Generally speaking,
the region between the Appalachians and the Rockies is level, and good
water-power is scarce; but there are exceptions, the most notable
being Niagara Falls, where there is great possibility for service. That
part of the Pacific coast which lies between the Coast Range and the
Sierra Nevada Mountains has good water-power. The Willamette
near Portland has a fall of forty feet whyrh produces energy equal
to a million horsepower.
EARLY INHABITANTS
The most recent investigations have tended to show that man existed
in England, Germany, and Java either within or before the glacial
period, the basis of the contention being the discovery of
very early skulls. His earliest authentic traces in America ve*&s gtuii
do not point to so remote a period. We have, however,
a disputed claim, which, if conceded, would give the American man a
very early origin. In 1866 workmen digging a mine-shaft in Calaveras
county, California, reported the discovery of a human skull in gold-
bearing gravel of what is generally held to be the pliocene age, although
12 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
some geologists have made it as late as pleistocene. The existence of
human life at so early a time was so improbable that a dispute at once
arose as to the genuineness of the discovery, with the result that
most authorities rejected the claim because the skull was found by
untrained persons, or concluded that it was either intruded into strata
artificially or that the strata themselves were irregular. The reported
discovery in 1913 of a skull in pliocene strata in Sussex county, Eng-
land, would, however, if confirmed by experts, give some support to
those who defend the Calaveras skull.
Another claim is that the presence of man in the glacial period, or
immediately afterwards, is shown by finding stone implements fash-
ioned by man in river drift along the Delaware river and
in Ohio and Minnesota. This claim is also disputed, the
supposition being that the implements found were intruded from the
surface at a much later period. The controversy over this matter
has been long and warm, but the defenders have found a valuable
ally in Volk, whose recent investigations have enabled him to say that
the existence of man on the Delaware in the glacial period cannot be
doubted.
A surer basis of reasoning is the skulls found in 1902 at Lansing,
Kansas, in a silt stratum on the banks of the Missouri. Two opinions
_. T arose as to their antiquity. One held that they were de-
Ine L«ans- .. , . ,, i • i i • i i •
ing Skulls, posited in me glacial or post-glacial period and were cov-
ered by debris which the river brought down from the
melting glaciers. Others held that they were deposited much later
and were covered with silt by the shifting currents of the Missouri.
The second view is more conservative, and has been generally accepted.
By it the Lansing skulls have been in position not less than one thou-
sand, and possibly thirty thousand, years. Investigation shows that
the skulls are those of American Indians. Eliminating .the claims
not universally received, they seem to be the earliest evidence of man
in America.
In various parts of the United States are earth mounds of great
antiquity. Some are conical, others elongated, others pyramidal, and
" M d others are irregularly shaped. The first class are usually
Builders " bimal mounds : the uses of the others are not known. Some
persons have been able to discern in the irregular ones a
resemblance to certain animals, as the Serpent Mound in Adams
county, Ohio. They are so far superior in construction to the works
of the Indians whom the whites found in North America, that it was
thought that they were made by a distinct race. This conclusion is
now generally discredited. It is agreed that they are of Indian origin,
although they probably were created by a superior and now forgotten
branch of that race.
Of similar interest are the " Cliff Dwellers," so called from the nature
of their dwellings, placed on inaccessible ledges on the steep sides of
THE INDIANS CLASSIFIED
canons in the southwest. They lived chiefly in the Mesa Verde re-
gion of Colorado, where their houses vary in size from one room to
more than a hundred. The buildings were evidently made
in secure places to protect the occupants from the attacks
of stronger, though less civilized, enemies who roamed the
plains. Their walls were of stone, and in the ruins are found evidences
of a culture more advanced than that of most of the Indians. It was
formerly assumed that the " Cliff Dwellers" were a distinct race, but
it is now believed that with the Pueblo Indians, the ancient Mexicans,
the Mayas of Yucatan, and the early Peruvians, they were only more
highly cultivated branches of the one original American race which
survives in the Indians.
THE INDIANS
There has been much speculation about the origin of this race, but
no theory advanced has been free from serious difficulties. The only
point definitely received is that at one time northeastern .
Asia and northwestern America "formed one culture Inr<Jfans°
area" ; but it cannot be asserted that the Americans came
from Asia or that the Asians came from America. Future investi-
gation may give more satisfactory results, but in a field where so
much is doubtful we are for the present forced to suspend judgment.
Although there is unity of general characteristics, there are striking
variations in the Indians, and it has become the rule to group the tribes
by these variations, the most notable of which are in cul-
ture, physical characteristics, and language. Linguistic
differences are most easily observed, and language is taken
as the basis of the groups, or families, as they are called.
But this kind of variation does not always coincide with the others,
and sometimes we find a small number of Indians remotely settled from
those to whom by language they seem to be closely related. On this
basis the United States Bureau of Ethnology divides the Indians
north of Mexico into fifty-nine families, the most important of which
are:
i. The Algonquian Family, inhabiting Canada from Hudson's Bay
southward and extending west as far as British Columbia, and in the
United States covering all New England, New Jersey, Delaware, east-
ern Pennsylvania, most of Maryland and Virginia, and practically
all of the Ohio valley, with the- Northwest as far as the upper waters of
the Mississippi. Among them were the Algonkins proper, Pequots,
Narragansetts, Mohegans, Powhatans, Pamlicos, Delawares, Shawnees,
Miamis, Kickapoos, Illinois, Fox, Cheyennes, and Arapahoes. Here
one sees the irregularity of the geographical distribution of tribes
linguistically related. The Algonquian group on the north Atlantic
coast was divided from the central body by the Iroquoian family, which
persistently held the country between Lake Erie and the Hudson, and
i4 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
far south were the Pamlicos in North Carolina, while much farther
west, beyond a vast country occupied by a Siouan stock, were the
Cheyennes and Arapahoes. By what means the sporadic tribes be-
came isolated from the great mass of the family is not known.
2. The Iroquoian Family, whose chief group lived in New York and
western Pennsylvania, on both shores of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario,
and on the St. Lawrence as far as Quebec. There were two southern
groups, not connected with one another or with the northern group :
one was the Cherokees in the southern extremity of the Appalachian
Mountain chain, and the other comprised the Tuscaroras and Notto-
ways in eastern North Carolina. Of the northern group the tribes
of greatest historical significance were : the Mohawks, Oneidas, Sene-
cas, Onondagas, and Cayugas, — generally called "The Five Na-
tions," — and the Conestogas, Eries, and Wyandots or Hurons.
3. The Muskhogean Family, who occupied most of Georgia, the up-
per strip of Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and that part of Tennessee
lying south and west of the Cumberland. The chief tribes were the
Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws, Seminoles, Alabamas, and Apalachis.
4. The Siouan Family, the chief group of which lived west of the
upper Mississippi and throughout most of the Missouri valley. It
included the Dakotas, Omahas, Winnebagos, Crows, lowas, Mis-
souris, and the Osage Indians. An eastern group lived in the western
Carolinas, where their principal tribe was the Catawbas. A small
sporadic tribe, the Biloxis, lived on the Gulf coast east of the mouth of
the Pearl river.
5. The Caddoan Family, whose home on the Gulf west of the mouth
of the Mississippi extended northward so as to cover most of Louisiana,
the eastern half of Texas, and the southern parts of Arkansas and
Indian Territory. The historically important tribes were the Caddos,
Pawnees, and Wichitas.
6. The Shoshonean Family, living in western Texas, New Mexico,
Colorado, northern Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Oregon, and parts
of Wyoming and Montana. Its notable tribes were the Shoshones,
Comanches, Paiutes, and Utes.
7. The Shahaptian Family, living chiefly in southern Washington.
Their important tribes were the Nez Perce, Umatillas, and Walla
Wallas.
8. The Salishan Family, whose home was in northern Washington
and British Columbia, and whose chief tribe was the Spokanes.
9. The Athapascan Family, who lived chiefly on the northern Pa-
cific coast from British Columbia to Alaska, and extended into the
interior so as to fill up the McKenzie valley. But there was a de-
tached group in western Oregon, another in California, and still
another in New Mexico and parts of Arizona and Texas, where lived
the long remembered Apaches and Navajos.
10. The Eskimauan Family, living in Arctic regions from Greenland
INDIAN SOCIETY 15
and Labrador on the east to the region beyond the Aleutian Islands on
the west. They are divided by localities into Greenland, Labrador,
Central, Alaskan, Aleutian, and Asiatic.
The classification includes, also, a large number of very small fam-
ilies, more than thirty of which are upon the Pacific slope. It repre-
sents with reasonable accuracy the distribution of the more important
historic families at the time they came within the knowledge of Euro-
peans. The distance at which some detached tribe is located from the
mass of the family indicates how far the Indians must have wandered,
searching for good hunting grounds or impelled by struggles with other
tribes. The dialectic differences between separated portions of the
same family seem to indicate the lapse of long periods since sep-
aration.
The Indians had little capacity to subdue nature. Hunting and
fishing were ever the chief means of subsistence of most of the tribes,
and, except in a few quiet groups of the warm Southwest,
agriculture was subsidiary to these natural supplies. Where .
so much depended on outside resources habits varied Sification.
widely with environment. Not only means of support,
but the character of the houses, and to some extent social and religious
ideals, were modified by external conditions. Thus it happened that in
the area occupied by one of the large families there were apt to be wide
variations of culture, and classification by culture would give different
groups from the linguistic divisions. It is only through recent inves-
tigations, largely by the United States Bureau of Ethnology, that
enough has been learned about the languages of the various tribes to
make a trustworthy classification on that basis, which is accepted as
most fundamental.
INDIAN CULTURE
The Indians lived in tribes, and most tribes were divided into clans.
The basis of clan unity was. kinship, although some members came in
by adoption. Each clan had a totem, some animal or plant
to which the members stood in special relation, and by
whose name it was known, as "Wolf," "Bear," or "Turtle." Some
believed themselves descended from the totem, others had no such
idea. Marriage within the clan was strictly forbidden, usually under
penalty of death. The wife retained membership in her own clan,
and as her children took her clan, they had no clan-relation with their
father's clan. This was the only kinship the aborigines knew anything
about. They did not inherit the father's movable property, but took
that of the mother. His possessions, if he left 'any, went to his own
clan kindred. They could not go to his brothers' children, since they
would follow the clan of their mothers, but passed to his sisters' chil-
dren, who alone of his mother's children could be kin to him. If a man
were killed, his clan held the murderer's clan responsible, either taking
16 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
"blood revenge," or demanding money instead. For one member to
kill another member of the same clan was exceedingly shocking to the
Indian's feelings, and they were loath to punish him with death,
since that involved the shedding of a fellow member's blood. In
some tribes the difficulty was obviated by first outlawing the mur-
derer, after which he could be dealt with. The clan was the strongest
knit of the social units, and its position was fundamental in Indian
society. It had a kind of sanctity through blood, as is illustrated by
the fact that some clans had the privilege of furnishing chiefs to the
tribes.
The clan had two kinds of leaders, a sachem and a chief. The former
had civil function in times of peace, being judge and administrator of
the ancient customs. He was elected by consent of the
Sachem c^an memDers and might be deposed by the same authority.
The office was permanent, and must be filled from the men
of the clan as soon as there was a vacancy. Adults, men and women,
had the right to vote for a sachem, and the choice usually fell on a
brother of the deceased, or the son of a sister, never on a son of the
former incumbent. The other clans in the tribe must approve of
the chosen candidate, and he must be inducted into office with ap-
propriate ceremonies in which the entire nation was represented.
As head of his clan he sat in the council of the nation. As there was
one sachem for each clan, and as the clans were long established
divisions of a tribe, the number of sachems was limited. For
example, there were eight clans in the Tuscarora tribe of the Iroquoian
family ; they were called from their totems the " Grey Wolf," " Bear,"
"Great Turtle," "Beaver," "Yellow Wolf," "Snipe," "Eel," and
"Little Turtle." Each had its sachem, and together they were the
most distinguished men of the tribe.
The chiefs were chosen for military purposes, and on account of
some special quality or work. The office was not necessarily contin-
The Chief uous> and the existence of a vacancy did not demand a new
election. The number of chiefs varied with the size of the
clan, in some modern tribes being one for each fifty persons, although
this proportion is believed too high for ancient society. The chief
was elected by the clan, which could depose him for unworthy conduct.
The sachem was the exponent of clan kinship, the chief represented
individual prowess. In some tribes there was a head chief, one of
the sachems whose ability pleased the tribe. His functions were con-
fined to the intervals between the meetings of the tribal council, and
were not important.
The clan and the tribe each had a council. Of the former all the
free adult members of the clan, men and women, were con-
Council sidered members. It elected and deposed sachems and
chiefs, decided what should be done to avenge or condone
the murder of a clan member, adopted new members, and regulated other
INDIAN WARFARE
matters pertaining essentially to the group. It was extremely demo-
cratic, and as the lowest unit of government gave tone to the delibera-
tions on affairs too large for its jurisdiction. There was also a tribal
council, composed of all the sachems and chiefs within the tribe. It
decided upon matters touching the entire tribe, as relations with other
tribes or with the whites. Any freeman might attend its meetings and
speak his sentiments there : even the women might be heard through
an orator whom they chose to speak for them ; but the decision was
left to the council. The Iroquois, and possibly some other tribes,
required that a vote of the council be unanimous.
In some of the large organizations there was a brotherhood, or
phratry, a third group which was between the clan and the tribe. It
was composed of clans, usually three or four. Its function
was social and religious. In the celebrated ball games ho*d r<
the two sides would represent two brotherhoods. Disputes
between two clans could be appealed to a council of sachems and chiefs
from all the clans in the brotherhood. In the funerals of prominent
men the brotherhood took conspicuous part, but its governmental
functions were never well developed.
Naming children was strictly regulated because it bore directly
on clan organization. Each individual had two names within his
life, one received at birth, the other at maturity ; that is, at
sixteen at eighteen years of age. Certain names were
peculiar to certain clans, and were not given to children of
other clans. In some tribes a youth was required to go on the war-
path and earn his new name by an act of courage or prowess. This
new name must be approved by the tribal council. An adult might
change his name if he could get a chief to announce it in council.
When a man was elected sachem or chief he took a new name selected
for him by the council.
In conferring names, and in many other affairs, the authority of the
clan or tribe was very great ; but in beginning war much was left to
the individual. Perhaps it is wrong to speak of the begin-
ning of ^ war. Strictly speaking, wars between the tribes
never ended, except those which resulted in alliances. An
interval of several years might elapse between outbreaks of hostilities,
but within that time each side considered itself in a state of conflict
with its enemies. The old men, remembering former trials, might
prefer peace, but the young men were apt to desire to fight. Under
such circumstances the latter would form a war party under some
chieftain of known ability, there would be a war dance, and immedi-
ately the party would march against the enemy. Each member would
take a pouch filled with Rockahominy, which was parched corn
pounded into flour. Between Indian tribes there were usually broad,
uninhabited zones, and the hostiles might, therefore, be many miles
away. The Catawbas in upper South Carolina had for hereditary
i8 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
enemy the Delawares, in the Delaware valley. The war party,
painted so their mission might be known, marched through this neutral
zone supporting themselves on game and fish until they were in the
enemy's country, where no fires must be made lest the smoke reveal
the approach of the warriors. Now they relied on the Rockahominy.
So accustomed were they to fasting that two spoonfuls of it moistened
with water and swallowed in haste was sufficient for several hours'
nourishment. If they could surprise the foe, they struck quickly and
returned with scalps and captives to their home to await some re-
taliating blow from the injured tribe. While such a war party was out,
the rest of the tribe might remain at their peaceful occupations. But
when the war was general and all the fighting men were out, they were
formed into war bands in the same way, each led by some noted brave
under whom the warriors desired to serve.
The most distinguished group of North American Indians was the
Six Nations of the Iroquoian family, five of whom lived through most
of our colonial period in western New York, and the other,
Nations tne Tuscaroras, in North Carolina. After suffering much
from their enemies they established early in the fifteenth
century a well-knit confederacy, with a common council and a strongly
aggressive policy. They proved themselves the scourge of surrounding
tribes. Their ancient enemies were the Algonkins of Canada and New
England. They became friends of the white men in New York, and
played an important part in the operations against the French of
Canada, who early incurred their resentment by helping the Algonkins.
A kindred southern branch, the Cherokees, played an important part
in the early history of Tennessee and the region south of it.
Tribes Further southward were the Creeks and other members of
the Muskhogean family, very numerous, and for a long
time they held back whites in the Gulf region. A large number
of tribes classified as the Siouan family lived in the northern Mississippi
basin and were represented by some branches on the upper Potomac
and in the Piedmont region of the East. They were especially de-
pendent on the buffalo, and followed it westward before the advance of
the whites. At the middle of the nineteenth century they were in
the vast Missouri valley, and their representatives, Cheyennes, Arapa-
hoes, and the Sioux, offered fierce resistance to the whites in the pe-
riod immediately following the Civil War.
The white settler's contest with the savage for territory divides it-
self into well-marked stages. The first colonies, weak and isolated,
soon came into conflict with some neighboring small tribes
fndfan Re wll° feared the loss of tneir land' The Pe(luot war in New
sistance.6 England and the Virginia outbreak of 1622 are illustrations.
The victory of the whites in these earliest struggles gave a
respite ; but as their settlements extended inland a larger number of
Indians became alarmed, a stronger combination was formed, and a
INDIAN THOUGHT 19
sterner struggle ensued. For example, see King Phillip's war in New
England, the Tuscarora war in North Carolina, and the Yemassee
struggle in South Carolina. Another defeat convinced the savages of
their weakness, and there followed another period of peace until the
Indians found external allies. On the north it was the French who
helped them, and several bloody wars were fought before this combina-
tion was broken. On the south outside aid came from Spain, though
not openly, and the Indians themselves were numerous enough to be
formidable. But the whites were now so well planted that the result
was beyond question. From this time Indian wars were frontier
struggles, the savages resisting their inevitable fate, sometimes stim-
ulated to it by the designed oppression of white men and mixed breeds
who wished an opportunity to seize Indian lands. In this way war
has run over the land from ocean to ocean, extinguishing some tribes,
greatly depleting others, and forcibly converting the remainder from
nomads to agriculturalists.
In the Indian's character were some of the best and some of the
worst qualities. In warfare he was stoically indifferent to his own suf-
fering and also to that of his enemies ; he was true to friends
and truculent to foes ; he was brave in battle, but he stalked
his enemies as he hunted wild game, and murdered them by
stealth if he could. When it was necessary he was abstemious, at
other times he was gluttonous : his virtues and vices were those of the
savage. His pathetic passage across, the page of history has appealed
to the idealist, but his cruelty and vindictiveness awakened horror
in most of those who encountered him.
His intellectual development was slight. The most advanced tribes
had no system of written language higher than picture writing, which
reached the stage of symbolism in Algonquian tribes, and
was rudely hieroglyphical in Mexico and Yucatan. His JJuiJn(
body of tradition, preserved orally, was limited ; and his
music, chiefly religious, was lacking in harmony, a rhythmic chant with
complex structure, designed to fire the will rather than please the ear.
In decorative art he was most successful ; for although he knew nothing
of higher forms, his designs for ornamental pottery, basketry, and
weaving had a quiet beauty which appeals to the best modern taste.
The same quality appears in the simple beauty of many of his myths.
His religion was animism, a belief in the existence of numerous
spirits. He was apt to stress most the importance of the spirit he
attributed to the thing most influential in his life, as the R u .
sun, the rain, or the moon. The tribes of the plains gave
high place to the spirit of the buffalo. The name manitou, or mystery,
was used by the Algonquian tribes for spirits, and it has become a
general term. The early travelers and missionaries spoke of the belief
in a "Great Spirit," single and invisible, but ethnologists have found
no evidence that the Indian had such an elevated ideal. He believed,
20 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
however, that man had a soul — some tribes thought he had several
— and that he lived after death in a "happy hunting ground." Some
Indians buried their dead, others cremated them, and others preserved
them as mummies. A man might make a manitou his friend, and if so
he became a shaman, or medicine-man. He could now, through the
aid of his manitou, drive away the evil spirit which was thought to
inhabit a sick person. He accomplished the work by singing, dancing,
and physical manipulations. Frequently the patient recovered: if
he died, it was said that he was possessed by a manitou stronger than
that of the shaman who treated him. In the more advanced tribes
of the Southwest there were associations of shamans to preserve the
secrets of their cult, among which were religious ceremonies.
Recent comparative studies have thrown much light on Indian
mythology. It reveals no well-defined idea of creation. Most of the
stories say that the earth once differed from its present con-
dition, and that men and animals then lived and talked
together and were the prey of great monsters. There was no daylight
or fire, and poverty and misery ruled the world. Finally came a
beneficent person who reformed tribes, taught man to improve his
habits, and gave him certain inventions. His work of betterment
done, he departed to come again. The Messianic quality of this per-
sonage probably suggested the idea that the Indians had a belief in a
"Great Spirit"; but he was only a culture hero, and not altogether
an admirable one ; for although he worked for others and had superior
intelligence he was sometimes a sharp trickster and was frequently
made ridiculous by his opponents.
The houses of the Indians were sometimes communal and some-
times designed for single families. Of the former the best type is
Houses ^e *on^ nouse °f tne Iroquian tribes. It was made of
bark and poles, and inner partitions divided it into several
compartments. A door at each end and openings in the partitions
gave an open passageway from one end to the other. In each alter-
nate opening in the partitions was a fire pit with a hole in the roof
above. One family occupied one compartment, and one fire thus
served two families. Around the walls of the room were hurdles made
of small poles, covered with mats and skins. By day they were
benches and by night beds. Sometimes the houses were large and
round, with one great fire pit in the center, at which the partitions
converged, making triangular compartments.
In a part of our Southwest, Mexico, and Central America the In-
dians lived in pueblos, the Spanish word for villages. These were
_ w great communal houses several stories high, the front wall
of each story dropping back so as to make a terrace. In
the modern pueblos doors are made in the walls, but formerly the
interior was reached through holes in the flat roofs, or floors, of the
terraces by means of ladders which were taken up at night or when
THE INDIANS AND CIVILIZATION 21
there was danger of intruders. The building material was either
adobe or rough stones laid in clay mortar. When the whites entered
the Southwest there were about sixty-five of these houses there. They
were the usual type of Mexican dwelling, and the imaginative Spaniards
who first saw them described them as palaces. In Yucatan they
achieved a degree of massiveness and ornamentation which indicates,
perhaps, the highest point of development in Indian architecture.
Tribes of different linguistic stock adopted this kind of house, and the
term Pueblo Indians has been used for all of them. It ought to be re-
membered that it has no family significance.
Contact with the white man made it necessary for the Indian to
adopt civilized habits or perish. In ordinary social evolution this
change would have required many centuries. Stimulated
by the liberal government of the United States the more
advanced tribes have made progress, the less advanced whites,
have caused disappointment to their well wishers. The
Cherokee and Muskhogean tribes have shown greatest power of
assimilation, both in their eastern homes and in the now obliterated
Indian Territory, where they resided for seventy-five years. They
show, also, a slight gain in population, which cannot be said of most of
the Indians who formerly lived on the western plains and who have
been gathered into reservations under government supervision. In
contact with civilization the Indian is abnormally susceptible to dis-
eases, particularly smallpox, measles, and tuberculosis. The use of
spirituous liquors is also especially harmful. The males generally
are averse to manual labor, and agricultural progress has often meant
more idleness for the men and more work for the women. Idleness
breeds bad habits, which retard racial progress.
In 1500 there were about half a million Indians in North America,
the great majority being in what is now the United States, where, by
the best estimates, there are now, 1911, only 322,715. In
the latter number are included 101,287 m tne fiye civilized
tribes, including freedmen and intermarried whites. Dur-
ing the last half century the Indian population seems to have been
about stationary. The Cherokees, Creeks, Choctaws, Chickasaws,
and Seminoles now included in Oklahoma are the five civilized
tribes. They are self-supporting and prosperous. In 1911 the total
federal appropriation for Indians was $10,452,911. In this year
$9,381,232 was spent on Indian education.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For physical features see : Farrand, Basis of American History (1904) ; Whitney,
The United States (1889) ; Shaler, Physiography of North America (in Winsor,
Narrative and Critical History, 1884) ; and Ibid., The United States of America.
2 vols. (1897). See also the articles on "North America" and "United States'
in Mill, International Geography (1900).
22 THE CONTINENT AND ITS EARLY INHABITANTS
On means of communication see : Brigham, Geographic Influences in American
History (1903), more geographical than historical; Semple, American History
and its Geographic Conditions (1903), many facts poorly arranged; Russell, Rivers
of North America (1898) ; Willis, The Northern Appalachians (1895) ; and Hayes,
The Southern Appalachians (1895). Besides Shaler, The United States of America,
and Farrand, Basis of American History, just mentioned, a good treatment of
natural resources is Patton, Natural Resources of the United States (1899). •
On American archaeology see Thomas, Introduction to the Study of North American
Archaeology (1898) ; and Moorehead, Prehistoric Implements (1900). On the same
subject also consult Farrand, Basis of American History, mentioned above.
On the Indians, valuable works are : Brinton, The American Race (1891) ; Dellen-
baugh, North Americans of Yesterday (1901); Powell, Indian Linguistic Families
(U. S. Bureau of Ethnology, Seventh Annual Report, 1891) ; Farrand, Basis of
American History (1904) ; and Thomas, Indians of North America (Vol. II of
History of North America, Lee, Ed., 1903).
For Independent Reading
Dellenbaugh, North Americans of Yesterday (1901) ; Parkman, The Oregon Trail
(1849) 5 Matthews, Navaho Legends (1897) ; Brinton, American Hero Myths (1882) ;
Grinnell, Pawnee Hero Stories (1889) ; and Lewis and Clark, Journals (in several
editions).
CHAPTER II
THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
EVENTS AND IDEAS LEADING TO THE DISCOVERY
THE first recorded contact of Europe and America was by way of the
north. In 874 a Norse colony settled in Iceland and made it a center
of culture and prosperity. Two years later a ship blown
out of her way returned to Iceland with the story of a great
body of land to the westward. For a hundred years no
efforts seem to have been made to investigate the report, but in 983
Eric the Red, exiled from the island for manslaughter, solved the
mystery, and named the newly discovered country Greenland, be-
cause he thought a good name would attract settlers. A colony was
planted, the remains of which are still visible, and in the year 1000
his son, Leif Ericsson, arrived from Norway with missionaries to con-
vert the country to Christianity. Vague reports were in circulation
of a great land to the west, and he set out to explore it, coming after
a time to a slaty shore, which he skirted southward for days, until he
came at last to a pleasant place where a river ran out of a lake into
the sea. He brought his ship into the haven and explored the country.
It abounded in timber and "wild wheat," probably oats; and one of
the crew, who came from the vine-growing portion of Europe, dis-
covered grapes still hanging in the autumn sunlight. Leif, thinking,
no doubt, that a good name would benefit this land as much Vinland
as that of his father, called the place Vinland. An attempt
to colonize Viniand now followed, and several voyages were made
thither within the next twelve years. All ended disastrously. The
place was too remote for successful exploitation, and the deeds of the
adventurers survived only in the sagas, a part of the heroic achieve-
ment of the Norse past. To the people of the time and to those who
succeeded them the newly discovered land was not part of a great
continent, but only an indefinite No Man's Land beyond the myste-
rious seas. It was probably what we now know as the shores of Nova
Scotia, although some students identify it with the New England
coast and point out Martha's Vineyard as the particular spot.
About 1390 two Venetian brothers named Zeno were
employed by the Earl of the Orkneys and Caithness in di- ] ?® 5®*°
f- i • mi i -IK- i M 11- Brothers.
rectmg his navy. They were skillful sailors, helping to con-
quer the Shetland Islands, and about 1394 they made a voyage to
23
24 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
Greenland. Stories of a great land to the west were brought in by fish-
ermen, and a few years later the younger brother, with the earl himself,
sailed to discover it. The story goes that they found land some days'
sail beyond Ireland, and that the earl remained to explore it. Zeno
wrote an account of his adventures, which, with some letters and a
map, were preserved in the family palace in Venice. In 1 558 all that re-
mained of them was published by a descendant, the map confessedly
improved by the editor. The text, much of which is lost through
neglect, was probably altered to suit the then recently acquired
knowledge of the New World. It is impossible to say what Zeno
discovered, but he may well have fallen upon some part of the North
Atlantic coast, to encounter which was easy if one only sailed long
enough west of Ireland.
Neither of these explorations served to bring the American continent
within the knowledge of Europe, because (i) the lands discovered
were not believed to be parts of a vast mainland, (2) the discoverers
were not strong enough economically to develop the new lands, and
(3) it was, after all, not a new continent that the Old World was look-
ing for, but a new way to an old one. The voyage of Columbus really
discovered America, but before it was made several things prepared
the way.
The most important was the disaster which overtook the trade
between Europe and the East in the second half of the fifteen century.
Spices, silk, perfumes, dyes, precious stones, and other
^Oriental11 or^enta^ g°°ds were brought west by three principal routes.
Trade. One was by water along the southern shore of Asia to the
Red Sea, thence by caravan to the Nile, and finally to
Alexandria. Another was a middle journey by caravan and rivers
through Persia and Syria to Acre, Antioch, and other Syrian ports.
A third was by river, caravan, and interior seas to the Euxine, where
Constantinople was the chief terminus of the trade. To these cities
came merchants from Italy, France, and Spain, purchasing the eastern
goods and passing them on to the interior and northern towns of
Europe. Most aggressive were the traders from Venice and Genoa.
From each eastern town they secured privileges of trade with perma-
nent quarters in which they were ruled by their own laws and protected
by their own home governments. These quarters, with their in-
habitants, became the outposts of a valuable industrial life. Both
towns also owned many colonies on the ^Egean Islands. In 1453 the
Turks seized Constantinople and began to take all the ports of the
East, until in 1517 Cairo was taken and Egypt became a Turkish prov-
ince. Each step in the conquest was followed by trade restrictions.
High tariffs were levied, privileges were curtailed, and the island pos-
sessions of Venice and Genoa were seized by the conquerors. These
disasters were felt by all the Mediterranean merchants, and stimulated
a general desire for another way to the East.
INTEREST IN THE EAST 25
Such a route, if discovered, must be by sea, and it must begin at the
Straits of Gibraltar. For centuries the ocean beyond this point was a
sea of terror on which sailors dreaded to venture. North
of the straits the coast was known as far as Scotland and Effects of
Scandinavia : south of it men sailed as far as Cape Non,
about seven hundred miles. The compass and the astrolabe e(jge.
slowly came into use on the Mediterranean during the
fifteenth century and enabled the mariner to sail confidently when
either land or stars were not in sight. The renaissance of science by
the middle of the fifteenth century dominated the minds of learned
men and was beginning to reach the more independent spirits in navi-
gation and other practical arts. Before such a process the sea of terror
became merely a part of the unknown, and as such invited discovery.
The first attempts to penetrate its mysteries were made by Por-
tuguese. On the east coast of Africa, south of Egypt, tradition then
located the native Christian kingdom of "Prester John," „
whose power and wealth were much exaggerated in the johne f, er
popular imagination. African traders in Morocco told
about interior towns from which roads ran southward to a southern
sea into which flowed a river great enough to be compared to the Nile.
To pass from Cape Non to the region of Abyssinia seemed possible,
and, since it would open a water communication to India, it would
be profitable. It was Portugal's fortune to have the man who
could lead in this work.
Prince Henry the Navigator was a younger son of John I. Without
family responsibilities or hope of the crown he could follow the prompt-
ings of a scientific and adventurous disposition. In 1419
at Sagres, on Cape St. Vincent, he established a home and
drew around him a group of intelligent mariners, geog-
raphers, and map makers. His father, brother, nephew, and great-
nephew, four generations of kings, supported his work and carried it
on after his death in 1460. The first results were Unimportant. The
Madeiras and Azores were rediscovered, explored, and colonized, but
the timid captains were afraid to get far away from the shore, and
Cape Boyador, under the Tropic of Cancer, was so dangerous that for
a long time none dared pass it. But in 1434 Gil Eannes, bolder
than his colleagues, sailed far out to sea, doubled the perilous point,
and proved that the "Sea of Darkness" was safe.
Progress was now more rapid. Year after year an additional por-
tion of the desert coast was observed, until finally, in 1445, Dinis Fer-
andez passing at last the glinting sands, came to a green
point which he called Cape Verd. A fertile country now
appeared, peopled by " Moors," or negroes, some of whom
were taken to Portugal, where slaves were in demand. It was the
beginning of a trade which threatened for a time to defeat the further
exploration of the coast. One expedition after another sent to make
26 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
discoveries came back with nothing but slaves. In 1455 Cadamosto,
passing the Cape Verd Islands, sailed so far into the Gulf of Guinea
that it was believed the southern extremity of Africa was turned. His
mistake was soon known, and the explorations were pushed on, more
slowly after the death of Prince Henry, 1460, until at last in 1487
Bartholomew Diaz sailed past the Cape of Good Hope. The mutiny
of his crew forced him to return to Portugal, but the world now knew
that Africa could be circumnavigated. The Portuguese discoveries
were important because they made explorations popular, created a
school of bold navigators willing to attempt any seas, and at last
brought men to the fabled East, tales of whose wealth up to that time
fascinated the European imagination like a fairy dream. They en-
larged the world's knowledge of geography, but threw little light upon
the question of the earth's shape.
The theory of the sphericity of the earth was held by Aristotle, who
died in 322 B.C. He drew his conclusion from the circular shadow of
the earth on the moon in eclipse and from the varying al-
Revived Be- titude of stars, and he announced that one common ocean
Sphericity probably united Spain and India. A century later Eratos-
of the Earth, thenes in Alexandria applied mathematics to this idea and
calculated the circumference of the earth, making it four-
teen per cent, too large. Other Greeks, probably very many, accepted
sphericity, but it was rejected by the early Christian church, which
had its own idea of the cosmos. Arabian scientists kept the spark of
knowledge alive through many centuries, and Roger Bacon in the
thirteenth century incorporated it in his Opus Majus, whence it was
abstracted by Pierre d'Ailly for his Imago Mundi (1410). The last
was a widely read work in the day when explorations and all kinds of
new knowledge were exceedingly popular. Astronomers and many
others at the end of the fifteenth century were ready to accept the
theory independently of the voyage of Columbus. Martin Behaim,
a German geographer, in the very year Columbus made his memorable
voyage, and without the discoverer's knowledge, made a copper globe
with the known lands described on it. In calculating the circumfer-
ence of the earth the astronomers made a mistake, estimating it at
three fourths of its real magnitude. The result was to make China
seem six thousand miles nearer Europe than it really is, a fortunate
error.
A better knowledge of the East also helped to prepare the way for
the discoveries of Columbus. In the later thirteenth century three
Venetian merchants named Polo went to Cathay, or China,
Mar8*0*7 °f for trade- One of tnem> Marco Polo, became a favorite of
Polo!0 tne ruler> or Grand Khan, and remained many years at the
court, where he had opportunity to learn about the extent,
geography, and wealth of the country. In 1295 the three returned
to Venice with great quantities of gems. In 1298 Marco wrote an
CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS 27
account of his adventures, calling it The Book of Ser Marco Polo.
Before this time China was believed to be bordered by immense
marshes, but he declared tha t it was washed by a vast ocean and that
within this ocean lay Cipango, or Japan, a great island rich in gold
and cities. The book fired the imagination of Europe, heightened
the charm of the East, and stimulated the hope of reaching the East
by sea. If the earth were a globe, why might not the ocean west of
the Straits of Gibraltar be the same as that east of Cipango ?
Thus through the merchants' desire for a western way to the East,
through improvements in navigation, through the slowly evolved
conviction that the world was round, and through the better acquaint-
ance with the geography of China, the time was come when some
adventurous man would compass the unknown by making a path from
the Straits of Gibraltar to fabled Cipango. The scholars believed
this possible but had not the courage to attempt it. Navigators had
courage to accomplish it but had not the mind to believe in it. Chris-
topher Columbus had the requisite skill and faith. He had also the
persistence and endurance necessary to carry him successfully through
the initial stages of an enterprise which the world could not understand.
THE ACHIEVEMENT OF COLUMBUS
Columbus 's father was a wool- worker, but the boy early became a
navigator. An age which knows as ours how poor boys of mind
become prominent will understand how he turned to the
most progressive vocation then open to him. He learned Jhe Educa~
Latin and read diligently the geographical books of the cohimbus.
day. He was attracted to Portugal, where he married
into the family of a prominent navigator. He sailed as far north as
England, possibly to Iceland ; and he lived for a time on the island
of Porto Santo, north of Madeira. We do not know how he came to
believe he could reach China by the west, but we know he mastered
all available knowledge on the subject. When he read in a book that
the frigid and torrid zones were uninhabitable, he confuted it in the
margin on the ground that the Portuguese sailed through the torrid
zone and found it inhabited, while the English and the Norse visited
the frigid zone. It was sound reasoning to set observation against
tradition. But when tradition favored him he accepted it. He saw
in the apocryphal book of Esdras that only one seventh of the surface
of the earth was water : had he been an equally sound reasoner he would
have withheld judgment until some one observed the quantity of earth
and water. But Esdras suited his theory, and he accepted the state-
ment without question. The error tended to make him think it was
but a short distance from Europe to his goal.
While in Portugal, about ten years before his famous voyage, Co-
lumbus learned that Toscanelli, a noted Florentine astronomer, had
28 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
announced the possibility of sailing from the west to the east. He
wrote to the Italian, asking for instructions, and received in reply a
copy of a former letter by the astronomer in which the possi-
bility of the fact in question was asserted, but no directions
canelli" f°r making the journey were given. In fact, they could not
have been given in the existing state of information about
the western seas, for these seas were not explored. Toscanelli perhaps
gave Columbus confidence in his ideas, but all the information in his
letter was to be found elsewhere.
Whatever the source, Columbus, when in Portugal, had the convic-
tion that his project was feasible. He talked so much about it that
he got the reputation of a boaster, and when he applied to
E°S- King J°hn n f or a ship to test his idea' he was turned aside
as a dreamer. It was then 1484, and he betook himself to
Spain, where for seven years he urged his plans with little
prospect of success. In the interval he sent his brother, Bartholomew,
to London to see if help could be secured there. It has been said that
Bartholomew gained a promise from Henry VII, but it was given after
the king and queen of Spain relented. It was really the queen who
gave the assistance. She was induced to do so by her former confes-
sor, Juan Perez, and by the treasurer of Aragon, Luis de Santangel.
To make his voyage, Columbus had three ships fully manned. The
expense was assumed by Isabella, who in her own right was sovereign
of Castile. The money, 1,000,000 maravedis, $59,000,
seems to have been borrowed on the queen's security. The
old story that she pledged her jewels is now generally dis-
credited. Columbus was made an hereditary grandee and admiral of
Castile, with the right to govern the new lands he should discover.
He and his heirs were to have one tenth of all the gold and silver he
should find, and they might pay one eighth of the expenses of fitting
out any expedition and take a similar portion of the profits thus se-
cured. Letters of introduction to the rulers of the East were also fur-
nished, and with these in his pocket the stern discoverer, raised from
the rank of adventurer to that of great lord and friend of sovereign
princes, embarked his unwilling crew of less than one hundred men.
August 3, 1492, in the early morning, the three ships, the Santa Maria,
Pinta, and the Nina, stood out to sea from the port of
parture " Palos, sailing first to the Canaries. The first was the largest,
and alone, of the three, had a deck. Her tonnage is esti-
mated at one hundred to two hundred and eighty, and that of her
companions at one hundred and forty and one hundred respectively.
A great event never depended on frailer agencies.
Stopping at the Canaries to refit, the fleet sailed again on September
6. Fear seized the hearts of the crew as they saw the land
'' disappear on the eastern horizon. They were steering
into seas hitherto unexplored, under the orders of a visionary, and
AMERICA DISCOVERED 29
were full of dismay. Columbus kept a diary of all that happened, re-
porting it to the queen ; but for the sailors he kept another log in
which he shortened the distance sailed. No storms were encountered,
and the trade winds blew him steadily westward. Scowling at first,
the crew at length became sullen, and finally, October 10, threatened
to throw the admiral overboard. To none of these difficulties would
he yield : "He had come to go to the Indies," he said, "and he would
keep on till he had found them with the aid of our Lord." It is well
to remember that Columbus's greatness consisted, not so much in his
original idea, as in the determined spirit in which he risked his life to
execute it.
On the evening of October 1 1 lights were seen in the darkness and
soon the roar of the surf was heard. At dawn a low green shore was
before them, an island which the natives called Guanahani,
and which the pious Columbus renamed San Salvador.
Its identity is lost, but the best guess is that it was Watling's
Island, one of the Bahamas. It was inhabited by naked savages with
whom the admiral conversed by signs. They reported a great king-
dom to the south, and he turned in that direction, discovering Cuba,
which he thought the mainland of India. The natives he called
Indians, and the term has persisted to this day. He was impressed by
seeing them drawing smoke through tubes made from the leaves of a
certain plant, and noted that the natives called these tubes tobaccos.
Sailing along the eastern half of the north coast of Cuba he came at
length to Hayti, which he called La Isla Espanola, whence Hispaniola.
It proved an ill-fated country, for on its shores he lost his best ship,
the Santa Maria.
Columbus's thoughts now turned to Spain, and leaving forty-four men
to establish a Spanish post, learn the language of the natives, and
plant food crops, he departed early in 1493. Storms har-
rassed his return, but March 15 he cast anchor at Palos. gp^11 '
All Spain echoed with his praise, and news of the discovery
quickly ran throughout Europe. Many people doubted if the new
lands were really India — among them the king of Portugal, who said
plainly they were only a part of Guinea, discovered by the Portuguese
and confirmed to his crown by papal bulls and by a treaty with Spain
in 1480. A serious quarrel might have followed, but Spain appealed
to the Pope, Alexander VI, a Spaniard, and May 3 and 4 he issued
two bulls dividing the new lands between the two countries. An
imaginary line was authorized one hundred leagues west of the Azores
and Cape Verde Islands, all the lands discovered east of it being given
to Portugal and all west and south of it going to Spain.
The arrangement was not satisfactory, and it was modified gjjjj Papal
by another bull, September, 1493, and by a treaty between
Spain and Portugal, 1494, by which the line of demarcation was fixed
at three hundred and seventy leagues west of Cape Verde Islands.
30 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
Columbus 's reports occasioned great enthusiasm in Spain, and
many expeditions were planned. Most of them ended in disappoint-
ment, but the work of exploration was forwarded. The
Expedition king and queen were delighted with their admiral and sent
him forth in September, 1493, with seventeen ships and
thirteen hundred persons, gentlemen adventurers, laborers, soldiers,
and missionaries, to plant a Spanish colony. The settlement was to
be under the admiral's absolute authority. A town was laid out in
Hayti and called Isabella. Gold mines were found in the interior, and
the neighboring natives, always submissive, were ordered to work them
and bring in a certain amount of gold each month. A native chieftain,
despairing of complying with the order, offered instead to cultivate
a large tract of land for the benefit of the whites ; but Columbus re-
jected the plan because he knew that gold alone would be valued in
Treatment Spain. He saw that if he could not satisfy this desire
of the he would have no support at home. The harsh meas-
Natives. ures he took with the Indians reduced the native popula-
tion of the island by two-thirds in three years. When he went to
Spain in 1496 many of his returned companions declared that there
was no gold in Columbus 's Indies ; but the admiral managed to pro-
duce enough of the precious stuff to satisfy the sovereigns that ex-
plorations should continue. A portion of the natives were cannibals,
and Columbus suggested that permission be granted to take these
to Spain for slaves. He probably hoped by this means to support
the explorations, as the negroes from Guinea supported the Por-
tuguese enterprise ; but Ferdinand the Catholic was not willing to
authorize the enslavement of the natives. Nevertheless Columbus
and others sent Indian slaves to Spavin, where they were generally
liberated. Spite of the efforts of the government, enslavement was
practiced in the colonies, until most of the natives of the West Indies
disappeared.
After 1496 Columbus made two voyages, one in 1498 and another in
1502. On the former he steered far southward, hoping to pass all
obstructions, reach the Indian ocean, and circumnavigate
F^rth*11'1 t^ie 8l°be. To his surprise he encountered a great body of
Voyages. land, about which Marco Polo said nothing, sailing past it
for days in a westward direction. A sailor let down a bucket
at one point and found the water fresh. It was from the mouths of
the Orinoco river, and Columbus rightly concluded that so great a river
must flow out of a vast continent. He spoke of it as another world,
never doubting, however, that the land discovered to the northward
was part of India. His fourth voyage was made to find a passage
between this new continent and the old. The journey was delayed
by great storms, but steering a more northerly course, he came at
length to the coast of Honduras. He sailed south about twelve
hundred miles past the Isthmus of Panama, whose narrowness he did
A R C T I <'
\ O C h A N
MAP OF
EARLY EXPLORATIONS
DEVELOPING THE COAST-LINE 31
not suspect, and returned to Spain in 1504 after many hardships. He
died two years later, May 20, 1506.
Columbus was most successful as an explorer. Here one needed
courage, persistence, intelligence, and faith in a mission; and he had
them all. As an administrator he was not successful. He
was sensitive, arbitrary, unyielding, and severe. Low-born UnhaPPi-
and a foreigner, he could not govern Spanish noblemen Columbus,
without friction. His appointment to command colonies
was unwise and brought him much sorrow. Numerous bitter enemies
sprang up among those whom he tried to rule, and their denunciations
cut his sensitive spirit deeply. The greatest indignity he suffered was
when in 1500 he was sent back to Spain in irons, charged with mal-
feasance. The spectacle aroused the sympathy of Spain, and the
king and queen ordered his release. But his political authority in the
New World was annulled, and his monopoly in discovery was limited.
EXPLORING THE COASTS OF THE NEW WORLD
Spain, Portugal, France, and England shared the labor of exploring
the world Columbus discovered. Stopped by its position across the
pathway to India, their mariners turned northward and
southward in search of a way to the Orient. Thus every Tw° pkases
gulf and bay of importance was explored until at last Cape £on xp
Horn was passed and the spice islands ^reached across the
vast Pacific. Then they took up the task of exploring the interior,
led on by a consuming hunger for precious metal. The rest of this
chapter deals with explorations by sea and land.
In this work Spain took the lead. Hayti, colonized by Columbus,
furnished a base for expeditions to the shores of the Gulf of Mexico
and the Caribbean 'Sea. Cuba, first circumnavigated in
1508, was immediately thereafter conquered and colonized J^1117?1
by Velasquez, and furnished a new and more westerly base. Lookout
Columbus's third voyage, 1498, developed the coast line
for nearly three hundred miles west of Trinidad, and his fourth, 1502,
revealed the shore from near the Cape of Honduras past the isthmus
to the Gulf of Uraba. In 1499 Hojeda, accompanied by Amerigo
Vespucci, sailed for America on an important voyage. He reached
the coast near Paramaribo, in Surinam, and sailed west to a point near
the terminus of the third voyage of Columbus. North of Honduras,
around to the south of Florida, explorations were made by various
persons from 1508 to 1522, and during the same period other Spaniards
explored the Atlantic coast as far north as Cape Lookout, in North
Carolina. This hollow coast line from Trinidad northward to North
Carolina, with the islands between, was looked upon by Spain as hers
by right of discovery, a,nd the claim was generally allowed.
32 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
To her also belongs the honor of discovering Brazil and the region
south of it. In 1499 Vicente Yanez Pinzon sailed for America.
BrazU Driven out of his course by a great storm he crossed the
equator and made land some distance south of it. Then
turning north he followed the coast for two thousand miles, past the
mouth of the Amazon, until he set out for home with the wonderful
news of a vast continent not hitherto mentioned in any then known
account of the East. Before he could reach Spain another adventurer,
Diego de Lepe, setting out later than Pinzon and returning earlier,
reported a similar discovery in the same region. He reached a point
as far south as Cape St. Augustine, in Brazil. Amerigo Vespucci
is believed to have accompanied de Lepe. Spain had no advantage
from these two important voyages ; for Brazil was east of the famous
papal dividing line.
The appearance of Vespucci in this narrative is interesting because
his name was given to the New World. This came, as we shall see,
v . from a piece of fraud committed, not to get the honor of
naming the continent, but to create the impression that he
first discovered it. He was born in Florence, became a man of busi-
ness, and in 1492 went to Seville as an agent for the commercial house
of the Medici. He became connected with the navigators, whose ships
he fitted out, and finally decided to accompany them on some of their
voyages. He made four journeys across the ocean, but was the leader
of none of them. His fame rests on his faculty of writing and on his
willingness to exaggerate his importance in the affairs he describes.
He later wrote two letters, in one of which he described his first voyage
and in the other all of the four. These letters were widely published
and created the impression that the writer deserved to have South
America bear his given name.
Vespucci says that he made the first voyage in 1497, that he sailed
along the northern coast of South America, and by mentioning no
other person as commander of the expedition he gives the
impression that the leadership was his. After much in-
vestigation and reasonable deduction it is generally con-
ceded that he antedated the expedition by two years in order to place
it before that of Columbus in 1498, that he really made it in 1499 m
company with Hojeda, who was sole commander, and that his de-
scriptions of the places discovered are almost exactly those of this later
voyage. His second journey was made in 1500. Again he omits the
name of the commander but says that he himself commanded one of
the ships. The latter statement is doubted because it is not sup-
ported by the fairly complete naval records of the time. His third
and fourth voyages are not important, being made to places admittedly
already discovered.
Vespucci's letter describing his third voyage was published in Latin
in 1503 with the title Mundus Novus. It is the first published Latin
THE WORLD CIRCUMNAVIGATED 33
account of the new continent south of what was still supposed to be
India. Columbus's letter describing his discovery of 1497 was not
published in Latin until 1508, whereas Vespucci's sec-
ond letter, in which all his alleged discoveries were des-
cribed, was published in Latin in 1507. The story of the
Florentine, therefore, first published in the language of learned men,
alleged to belong to the year 1497, and told in an attractive style,
created the false impression that he and not Columbus discovered
the great unknown mainland, and in his honor the name " America,"
from the Latin form of his Christian name, was given to that region —
but not at first to the region north of the Isthmus of Panama.1 The
order of development is something like this : first we have "America"
south of the isthmus and " India" north of it ; next, "America" south
of the isthmus and "North America" north of it finally; "South
America" in the south and "North America" in the north. The first
person to use the name "America" —although others earlier used
" Mundus Novus " for South America — was Martin
Waldseemliller, a professor of geography at St. Die, who
in a book of his own published Columbus's second letter in
1507. Thoroughly under the influence of Vespucci's narrative he
described this newly discovered land and added, since " Americus dis-
covered it, it maybe called Amerige; in other words, the land of Amer-
icus, or America." He said further that he preferred the form "Amer-
ica," since both Europe and Asia were named for women. A map
which accompanied his book used the name, which was soon in gen-
eral popular use in most of Europe outside of Spain, where the term
"Indies" was used long after its absurdity was recognized. Wald-
seemuller later changed his mind about the name, and in a map which
he made in 1513 substituted the term "Terra Incognita" ; but it was
too late to overtake the error of 1507.
But one more discovery was now needed to make the New World
stand in clear relief before the eye of the old — and that was made by
Magellan in 1519-1522. Although a Portuguese, he sailed
under Spanish authority with five ships manned by un-
willing and mutinous crews. He spent the first winter on
the eastern shore of South America, forty-nine degrees south, where
the climate was like that of Newfoundland. Here he put down a
mutiny by his individual courage, and in the spring resumed his jour-
ney. October 21, in the Antarctic spring, he entered the straits which
now bear his name — a channel from two to five miles wide and three
hundred and twenty-five miles long. Its last half passes between
high rocky banks with impressive mountains on each side. The little
fleet passed through fearsomely, not knowing what mysterious terror
the next league ahead might present. At length the cliffs receded and
1 The arguments in this connection are admirably given in Bourne, Spain in America,
ch. vii.
D
34 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
the straits opened to a broad ocean which Magellan called "Mare
Pacificum." He struck out boldly to the northwest, and after much
suffering came at last to the rich islands of the East. He was killed
in battle with the natives in the island of Matau, one of the Philip-
pines. A single ship survived the perils of the sea and reached Spain,
having proved the truth of Columbus's dream.
Next to Spain, Portugal took prominent part in American explora-
tions. Her West African voyages throughout the fifteenth century
Portuguese gave her a prestige which the immense activity of Spain at
Explorations, the close of the century threatened to discredit. Spurred
Vasco da by this thought she sent out Vasco da Gama in 1497. He
Gama. went first to the Cape Verde Islands, then striking into the
great South Atlantic, sailed without signs of land till he came to thirty
degrees south latitude, when he turned to the southeast, and after a long
time reached the coast at a point one hundred miles north of Cape of
Good Hope. His course represented two sides of a triangle, to cover which
he took ninety-three days, out of sight of land; whereas Columbus
on his first voyage took only thirty-five days from the Canaries to
Guanahani. Passing then around the cape, which had been unvisited
since Bartholomew Diaz was blown past it in 1487, he sailed on to
India, where, indeed, the lands of spices and gems lay before him.
His return to Lisbon brought the glow of old-time pride to the hearts
of his compatriots. It shows in a letter the king sent to Ferdinand and
Isabella, announcing that a Portuguese captain had reached the real
India where there were real pepper and real rubies.
In 1500 another Portuguese navigator sailed into the unknown seas,
going as boldly into the north as da Gama went into the south. This
was Gaspar Corte-Real, who sailed many days and found
Reals 0rtC" "a land which was very cool and with great woods," but
not otherwise described. In 1 501 , with three ships he sailed
for the same coasts. One of the vessels was lost with the com-
mander aboard, but the others returned with fifty captive Eski-
mos. Surviving stories and contemporary maps show that he
visited Labrador and explored Newfoundland. In 1502 his brother,
Miguel Corte-Real, went out to find the lost Gaspar and was
himself cast away. A year later the king sent out an expedition to
find the two brothers, but it was futile. These northern explorations
are only geographically important: Portugal founded no territorial
claims on them.
More important were her attempts on the Brazilian coast. In
1500, a few months before Gaspar Corte-Real sailed, one of her cap-
Cabral tains, Cabral, with thirteen ships dropped down to the Cape
Verde Islands, and, like da Gama, stood thence out into the
ocean. But he turned farther west, where the ocean is narrowest, and
reached land in eighteen degrees south latitude and took possession in
the name of Portugal. He sent one ship to report his discovery and
WORK OF THE CABOTS 35
with the others sought to pass beyond this land to India. Storms im-
peded his progress and he was forced to turn back.
While Spain and Portugal explored and acquired portions of the
New World, England, through no inclination of her own rulers, ex-
plored and secured title to the portion she was later to
colonize. John Cabot, born in Genoa, but a naturalized
citizen of Venice, after unsuccessful attempts in Spain and john
Portugal, came to England, where the king, Henry VII, in
1496 gave him such lands as he might discover beyond the sea to hold the
same in the English name. In a ship no larger than Columbus's Nina,
with a crew of eighteen, he sailed in May, 1497, and four hundred leagues
west of Ireland come to land, probably Newfoundland. He skirted
the coast southward for three hundred leagues and returned to Eng-
land, where the thrifty king rewarded him with a gift of ten, and an
annual pension of twenty, pounds. A year later be sailed on a second
voyage the detailed results of which we do not know ; but from various
sources it seems probable that on this expedition he explored the At-
lantic coast from Long Island to South Carolina. With this voyage
he disappears completely ; probably he perished on it. He was not an
educated man, like Columbus, and the English were not interested
in discoveries. Accordingly we have in England only the barest
documentary evidence in regard to the voyages. Both this meager
record and the fact that English explorations were not notably con-
tinued show how little interest our mother country had in the lands
beyond the sea. But the agents of the Spanish and Italian govern-
ments then in England felt a lively interest. They reported to their
superiors all they heard about Cabot's achievements, and from this
source we get most of our scanty information.
John Cabot had a son, Sebastian, for thirty-six years Chief Hydrog-
rapher of Spain and after that adviser in matters of navigation to
the English admiralty. He was highly esteemed by his
contemporaries and posterity. An inscription on his
picture and another on a map which he made in 1544 assert
that he was with his father when, in 1497, land was discovered in the
north. Sebastian talked freely in Spain to persons who have reported
his words. From these three sources grew the impression that Sebas-
tian was a great discoverer. Some of the statements in the story are
contradicted by the scant contemporary records which refer to John
Cabot, and the result is a lowering in later years of the fame of the son ;
but it is impossible to come to a satisfactory conclusion in the matter.
England forgot the Cabots for a century. But in the days of Raleigh
and Hakluyt she recalled them to mind, and these voyages became the
basis of her claim to the North Atlantic coast.
France, through the efforts of two men, took part in American ex-
ploration. In 1524 Giovanni da Verrazano tried to find a passage to
India by the northwest. It is difficult to determine from his narra-
36 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
tive how much of the Atlantic coast he explored ; but it seems that
he entered New York harbor and the Hudson river and penetrated
Narragansett Bay, after which he sailed north as far as
Flotations*" Newfoundland. In 1534 Jacques Cartier, a Breton, sailed
Verra- w^ two sn^Ps on wnat proved a more important vcyage.
zano." He explored the Gulf of St. Lawrence and was forced
home by stormy weather. Next year he came again to
the same place, took up his labors where he suspended them in 1534,
and went up the St. Lawrence as far as what is now Quebec. Then
he took rowboats, with which he reached the Indian vil-
lage of Hochelaga at the site of Montreal. The rapids
which here stopped his search for a passage through the continent were
later called "La Chine" in ridicule, it is said, of his attempt to find
China through this river. Cartier 's exploration was the basis of
French title to Canada. It was followed in 1541 by an attempt to
plant a colony, Roberval having the command and Cartier showing
the way. A fort was built near Quebec, but the Indians drove off the
garrison, and killed or discouraged the colonists so that they gladly
escaped to France.
The earliest maps after the discovery of America show us how Eu-
rope gradually came to realize the shape of the new continent. The
Earl Ma s ^rst Preserved was by Juan de la Cosa (1500). He was
with Columbus in 1492 and 1493, and with Hojeda in 1499.
He was informed about the other discoveries and accounted for them
on his map. He shows the coast line of North and South America
in the shape of a great letter U which lies on one side. The discoveries
of Cabot represent the upper leg and the Spanish discoveries in the
northern part of South America represent the lower leg. The curved
interior takes the place of the shores of the Gulf of Mexico and the
Caribbean Sea, within which the Antilles are correctly placed. North
and south of the terminus of each leg the shores go off at right angles.
Opposite the upper one and well out in the ocean he places the land
discovered for Portugal by Corte-Real, not knowing it was nearly
identical with Cabot's discovery. These Spanish, English, and Por-
tuguese lands are located with approximate correctness, but the lines
which connect them, the inner curved part of the figure, were drawn
without experimental knowledge, probably by guess.
A map made for Cantino, an Italian envoy in Portugal, about 1502,
adheres more closely to known facts. Unknown parts of the coast
are entirely blank, the northern part takes a vertical position, Florida
and the shore north of it comes into a semblance of itself, and the same
is true of South America from the Gulf of Uraba to the Tropic of
Capricorn. A map by Stobnicza, 1512, has the parts of coast line
omitted from the Cantino map, and one by Waldseemiiller, 1513, gives
an outline of the two continents with a suggestion of accuracy. A
French globe, about 1527, shows Asia connected with South America.
SPAIN IN CENTRAL AMERICA 37
EXPLORING THE INTERIOR
The second stage of exploration was directed into the interior and
it went hand in hand with colonization, Spain taking the lead. First
Hayti (1494) and then Cuba (1508) were settled. These
two islands soon developed a number of vigorous Spanish- sPanif h Ex-
born grandees who were willing to attempt adventures on jj01*4*0118 m
... . . 01 the Interior,
the unexplored mainland. Such a one was Hernando Cortez
Cortez, who in 1519 sailed to conquer Mexico, the wealth
and advanced culture of which was previously reported to the whites.
He took with him five hundred and fifty Spaniards, two hundred and
three Indians, one negro, and sixteen horses. He destroyed his ships
when he landed at Vera Cruz, and announced to his men his determina-
tion to conquer Mexico or die. At that time the Mexicans expected
the return of a culture hero, Quetzalcoatl, who, tradition said, would
come back to bless the people. Some of them considered the arrival of
the Spaniards the fulfillment of the prophecy. Cortez was quick
enough to use this opportunity, but his main reliance was his sword.
His firearms, armor, and horses gave him an advantage, but the vast
numbers of his enemies would have outweighed it had he been less
capable or his enemies been well united. He forced his way to the
Aztec city of Mexico, where the superstitious natives received him
darkly. Fearing an outbreak he seized Montezuma, the Mexican
ruler, and when the capital flew to arms withdrew for the time and
established a siege which was finally successful. After two and a half
years of severe struggle he and his little army were masters of Mexico.
Another explorer of the interior was Balboa. He was a bankrupt
planter who left Santo Domingo secretly to escape his creditors,
and joined an expedition which was trying to plant a col- _ .
ony near the Isthmus of Panama. Small, ugly, and poor, he
nevertheless was born to command and was soon the leading spirit
in an otherwise failing enterprise. By his resolution he resisted all
attempts to supplant him and finally performed a feat which made
him famous. When some Spaniards were disputing over a bit of
gold, an Indian told them he could show them a great water over
which came quantities of the yellow metal. Balboa remembered the
words, and with about two hundred Spaniards set out to find this sea.
His march of forty-five miles was through a tropical tangle of jungle
to penetrate which required the labor of eighteen days. At length
he neared the sea. Halting his men he climbed the last impeding
ridge so that he alone might first see the object of his search. Then
this bankrupt adventurer, stern ruler of men, heartless betrayer of
benefactors, and relentless victor over his personal enemies, knelt
and thanked "God and all the Heavenly Host who had reserved the
prize of so great a thing unto him, being a man but of small wit and
38 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
knowledge, of little experience, and lowly parentage." Thus it was
that Balboa discovered the Pacific Ocean in 1513.
More interesting but less significant historically were the explora-
tions of Ponce de Leon in 1513. Twenty years of adventure in the
Ponce de West Indies had developed him into a great captain.
Leon. He finally set out to find Bimini, a land in which the
Indians said there was much gold and a fountain of perpetual youth.
On Easter Sunday he discovered the mainland, which he called Florida,
from Pascua Florida, the Easter season. He landed at St. Augustine
harbor, and thence explored the coast southward until he passed the
extremity of the peninsula. The name "Florida" was later used by
Spain for the coast as far north as the Chesapeake Bay.
Another explorer was de Narvaez. In 1527 he sailed from Spain
for Florida with a colony of six hundred persons. Desertion and
. „. shipwreck reduced these to four hundred, most of whom
de Narvaez. , *_, , . , , .. , A . _. . .
landed .in the western part of what is now Florida some-
where north of Tampa Bay. Indian reports of a great town lured
them into the interior, where they were surrounded by vast numbers
of savages and forced back starving to the coast at Pensacola Bay.
They built boats, converted their horses into food, made sails from
horsehides and from their own clothes, and sailed — not for Cuba,
but westward, where they hoped to join their fleet. In this they were
disappointed: one by one their rude boats were destroyed: de
Narvaez was drowned; and the remnant, now fifteen, took refuge
with the Indians, who first beat them and then discovered that they
were medicine-men. For five years they managed to keep in favor
with the savages, passing from tribe to tribe in great honor. Finally
four men, all who were left of the six hundred whom de Narvaez
brought out nine years earlier, reached the city of Mexico. One
of them was Cabeca de Vaca, historian of the expedition, whose
journal makes a thrilling narrative. He described the interior of the
continent in glowing terms and gave a stimulus to later disastrous
attempts at exploration.
One of 'the victims of this exaggeration was Hernando de Soto,
who having gained a fortune in Peru with Pizarro was made governor
D s of Cuba and ruler of Florida, which he was to explore
and colonize at his own expense. May 30, 1539, he
landed at Tampa Bay with over six hundred and twenty men. He
spent the summer and winter near the coast, and in the spring marched
northward, across Georgia, South Carolina, and part of North Caro-
lina. He crossed the Blue Ridge Mountains in the last-named state
near the point where rise the highest peaks of the Appalachian system,
then turning south again reached southern Alabama in October,
1540, always looking for "some rich country," fighting several battles
with the Indians, and suffering much from hunger and sickness.
De Soto learned that a fleet awaited him on the coast, but concealed
CORONADO'S MARCH 39
the fact from his men and marched again for the interior. He wintered
in northern Mississippi, and moving on in the spring came on May 8,
1541, to the Mississippi near Memphis. He crossed and spent the
summer exploring what is now Arkansas. He encamped, and in
the spring would have gone farther into the west if his men and horses
had not failed him. Broken spirited, he fell sick, and May 21, 1542,
he was buried in the river he had discovered. His adventures took
three years. His followers built boats and escaped down the river
and along the coast to Mexico. De Soto gave his fortune and his
life to this enterprise and the result was expressed in the extension
of geographical knowledge for the benefit of the world at large.
In Mexico at this time a story was circulated of seven cities which
an Indian had visited, each as great as Mexico City. The narrative
of Cabeca de Vaca seemed to confirm it ; and the excitable Coronado
imagination of the adventurers seized it with avidity.
A friar sent to investigate returned, saying he came in sight of one
of the cities, probably the pueblo of Zuni, and preparations were
made for a conquest of this wonderful region, believed to be as rich
as Mexico. Francisco de Coronado was appointed to lead the colony.
He set out in 1540 with eleven hundred men, Spaniards and Indians;
but he left the main body on the north shore of the Gulf of California
and went into the interior with fifty horsemen. He took Cibola,
which proved to be a pueblo without treasure. Not discouraged, he
ordered up the main body and struck into New Mexico. He went
as far as the border of Oklahoma, and with an advance guard arrived
at the center of Kansas within nine days' march of the point to which
De Soto at that very time had penetrated in Arkansas. He found
pueblos and Indian villages, but no treasure, and returned to Mexico
in 1542 with the loss of only a few of his followers. Thus from 1513
to 1542 Spain explored Florida, Mexico, and the region north of the
Rio Grande, discovering their real character and opening the way
for colonization.
Such was the work of Cortez, Balboa, Ponce de Leon, Narvaez,
de Soto, and Coronado. They were strenuous men, sparing neither
themselves, their followers, nor the natives, whom they Spanish
plundered, enslaved, and slew with great cruelty. Through Colonial
their efforts Spain in fifty years, from 1492 to 1 542, explored Power'
and held a vast region. Nor was gold-seeking their only interest :
agricultural colonies quickly followed the adventurers; and their
strength is shown by the part they contributed to further explora-
tions. No other colonizing nation in America did so much in so short
a time. Had not the wars of Phillip II, soon to begin, paralyzed
Spanish industry and checked emigration to the colonies, it seems
likely that a very strong Spanish empire would have been established
from Florida to the mouth of the Orinoco.
40 THE DISCOVERY AND EXPLORATION OF AMERICA
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The discovery of America has been described in many books. Among them
the most available for American students are : Harrisse, The Discovery of North
America (1897), scholarly and ample; Fiske, The Discovery of America, 2 vols.
(1892), brilliant in style but disproved in some of its points by later writers ; Bourne,
Spain in America (1904), the most reliable as well as the best written one- volume
treatise on the subject in English; Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of
America, 8 vols. (1888-1889), v°l- H deals with the period of discovery, especially
valuable for references; and Channing, History of the United States, vol. I (1905).
On the Norse discoveries see: Reeves, Finding of Vineland the Good (1890),
and Storm, Studies on the V inland Voyages (trans., 1889).
On Columbus see: Harrisse, Christophe Colomb, 2 vols. (1884); Vignaud,
La Vie de Colomb avant ses Decouvertes (1905); Thacher, Christopher Columbus,
3 vols. (1903-1904); Winsor, Christopher Columbus (1892); Markham, Life of
Columbus (1889), for the general reader; and Irving, Life of Columbus (1828-
1831), the most widely read book on the subject, and still in demand.
Among contemporary Spanish works the following are important: The Life
and Actions of Admiral Columbus, ascribed to his son, Ferdinand, most valuable
for the period after the discovery when it follows the journals of Columbus (trans,
in Chur hill, Voyages, 1744-1746, and Pinkerton, Voyages, 1808-1814); Las
Casas, Historia de las Indias, 5 vols. (about 1525, published 1875-1876); Peter
Martyr, De Orbo Novo (about 1555) ; Oviedo, Historia General y Natural de las
Indias, 4 vols. (ed. 1851-1855) ; Herrara, Historia General de las Indias (1828-
1830) ; and Navarrete, Coleccion de los Viages y Descubrimientos , 5 vols. (1825-
1837)-
On Spanish explorations see Bourne, Fiske, and Winsor, as described above,
for brief accounts in English, and Navarrete for a reliable Spanish source. On
English voyages of exploration see Hakluyt, Principall Navigations, etc., of the
English Nation, 16 vols. (Edinburgh ed., 1885-1890) ; Harrisse, John Cabot . . .
and Sebastian his Son (1896) ; Weare, Cabot's Discovery of North America (1897) ;
Dean, chapter on Cabot in Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, vol. Ill (1884) ;
Markham, Letters of Vespucci (1894) ; Helps, Life of Cortez, 2 vols. (1871) ;
Guillemard, Life of Magellan (1891) ; Bourne, ed., Narratives of De Soto, 2 vols.
(1904) ; Winship, ed., Journey of Coronado (1904) ; and Smith, Cabeca de Vaca
(1866). Important general works on Spanish settlements are: Lowery, Spanish
Settlements, 2 vols. (1901, 1905) ; Helps, The Spanish Conquest in America, 4 vols.
(Oppenheim, ed., 1900-1904) ; and Bancroft, History of Central America, 3 vols.
(1886-1887).
On the French explorations of the coast line see : Harrisse, Les Corte-Real et leur
Voyages (1883) ; Murphy, The Voyage of Verrazzano (1875) 5 Parkman, Pioneers
of France (1865); and Gaffarel, La Floride Franqaise (1875).
For Independent Reading
Markham, Life of Columbus (1892); Irving, Life of Columbus (1828-1831);
Fiske, Discovery of America, 2 vols. (1892); Bourne, Spain in America (1904);
and Payne and Beazley, eds., Voyages of Elizabethan Seamen (1907), extracts
from Hakluyt.
CHAPTER III
THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
THE GENTLEMEN ADVENTURERS
NOTHING shows better the rapid progress of Spanish colonies than
the fact that England became interested in colonization through
depredations on them. Captain John Hawkins, of
Plymouth, Devonshire, did much to open this phase of
English history. Negro slaves were in demand in Spanish Hawkjns
colonies, and although foreigners were forbidden to trade
there, he determined to get access to the market. In 1 563 he arrived in
Hayti with three hundred negroes, whom the planters, not knowing the
king's law, or disregarding it, gladly purchased. He loaded his
ships with produce, and sailed for Europe, sending two of them to
Spain, where they were promptly seized by the authorities. His
courage rose with opposition, and he soon reappeared with another
cargo. When the timid colonists hesitated to purchase, he landed an
armed force, and frightened off the officials, whereupon the slaves
were sold. The king — it was Philip II — now sent a fleet to enforce
the laws. It found Hawkins, recently returned from a third voyage,
safe in the harbor of Vera Cruz, whose defenses he had seized. He
hesitated to appeal to force and agreed to admit the Spanish com-
mander to the harbor on the promise of immunity from attack.
The pledge was broken, the English being cut to pieces by the superior
number of their opponents. Two ships escaped, one commanded
by Hawkins, the other by his nephew, Francis Drake.
Both men were henceforth implacable enemies to the Spaniards.
They became the center of a group of hardy captains who dealt
Spanish ships many a blow, and who at last united to Drake
overthrow in 1588 The Invincible Armada which Philip
sent against England. Their most notable single adventure was when
Drake in 1578 in The Pelican sailed around South America, took
great quantities of gold from unwary Spaniards, explored the west
coast to the -forty-eighth parallel, and circumnavigating the globe re-
turned to England to be knighted for his success. These adventures
revived English interest in America and promoted colonization.
Hawkins and Drake had many imitators. One of them, Sir Hum-
phrey Gilbert, in 1578 received from Queen Elizabeth a patent grant-
41
42 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
ing him power, civil and proprietary, over all lands which he might
colonize not held by a Christian prince. He wished to discover a
Gilbert northwest passage to China, and believed that a colony
in America would be a useful base for his explorations.
In the same year he went out with seven ships, one commanded
by his half-brother, Walter Raleigh, then twenty-six years old. The
expedition encountered the Spaniards, and soon returned to England.
In 1583 Gilbert sailed to Newfoundland to plant a colony there, but
he was lost in a storm and his expedition failed. He was a model
knight and Christian, and his last known words shouted from the deck
of his little ship, then battling for life in the waves, — "The way to
heaven is as near by sea as by land," — have often been repeated by
Englishmen.
Walter Raleigh took up his dead brother's work, the queen issuing
a new charter, and in 1584 he sent two ships under Philip Amadas
Ralei h a Arthur Barlowe to explore the Atlantic coast before
attempting to plant a colony. With an eye on the rich
Spanish galleons, which English captains were accustomed to plunder
on sight, they first sailed to the West Indies, then turning
pedltion." northward came to the coast near Cape Lookout, North
Carolina, and skirting the shore found an inlet which
does not now exist, and so came in July through Pamlico Sound to
Roanoke Island. The rich vegetation, the abundance of fish, and the
friendliness of the natives delighted them, and they returned with
wonderful stories of what they saw. They reported an abundance
of grapes, which abound in that locality to this day ; and they found
something — probably the persimmon — which they took for the
date. Their written description of the place was designed to enlist
the efforts of future adventurers, please the queen, and increase the
glory of their employer. Elizabeth was enough gratified to confer
knighthood on Raleigh, and to call the country Virginia in token of
her unmarried state.
In 1585 Raleigh sent Ralph Lane, a brave, tactless captain of
infantry, with a hundred men to land at Roanoke Island, make a
better investigation of the interior, and select a site for
pedftion * a Permanent settlement. He explored Albemarle Sound,
went up the Roanoke river until he realized that it was not
a northwest passage, and heard from the Indians of Chesapeake Bay,
which he properly concluded was better suited than Roanoke Island
for the proposed colony. His abrupt manner brought him the hostility
of the Indians, his supplies were soon gone, and when in 1586 Sir
Francis Drake came to the coast, after a profitable cruise in the West
Indies, Lane was glad to embark for England. A few days later
Sir Richard Grenville touched at the place with supplies and recruits.
He left fifteen men with food to hold the country in the name of the
English and sailed off to the West Indies to capture Spanish treasure.
EFFORTS OF RALEIGH 43
Raleigh now prepared to plant a permanent colony. May 8, 1587,
he sent out three ships with one hundred and fifty colonists, twenty-
five of whom were women and children. The commander
was John White, who was with Lane in 1 5 85 and who showed
his confidence in the enterprise by bringing with him
his own daughter, Eleanor, and her husband, Annanias Dare. White
was to pick up the garrison left by Grenville and plant the "Citie of
Raleigh in Virginia" on the Chesapeake. But arrived at Roanoke
the hired captain refused to go farther, and when White and the men
of the colony were on shore, put their effects on land and sailed away
with two of the ships. A more resolute explorer than White, as
Cortez or De Soto, would have gone on board, overpowered the cap-
tain, and taken the ships to their proper destination.
The island was inaccessible from the sea and its soil was poor.
The colonists soon became discouraged and urged White to return
to England for supplies. Late in August he set sail in
the one ship at the disposal of the settlers, leaving behind colony/-8*
him a granddaughter, Virginia Dare, born August 18,
the first offspring of the English race in what is now the United States.
England at that moment was expecting the arrival of the Spanish
Armada, and a strict embargo was laid on shipping. White was
forced to remain in the country, and it was not until 1591 that he
came, in a hired ship, to ascertain the fate of the colony. The island
was deserted, the fort was in ruins, and the only evidence of the fate
of the colonists was the word "Croatoan" carved on a tree. It was
the name of a friendly tribe of Indians dwelling near Cape Hatteras.
Before his departure it was agreed that if the colonists removed they
would carve the name of their place of refuge on a tree, and if they
went in distress a cross was to be added. As no cross appeared, White
took courage. He would have gone to Croatoan, but the captain
of the fleet, fearful of storms, would not delay, and spite of later
efforts of Raleigh to find them, the colonists were never seen again
by white men. The settlers at Jamestown, planted twenty years
later, learned from the Indians that the people of Roanoke went to
the Indians, but were later massacred through the agency of Pow-
hatan. The Indians added that four men, two boys, and one maid
were saved by a friendly chief. If so, they were probably adopted
into the tribe according to the Indian custom.1
The enterprise at Roanoke Island wasted Raleigh's fortune, and
the colony itself was a failure, but he kept up his interest
in Virginia, saying in 1602 when about to be sent to the
Tower, "I shall yet live to see it an English nation." isiand.
He did, indeed, at Roanoke Island plant the seed which
1 The claim that the mixed breeds of Robeson county, N. C., formerly known as Scuffle-
tonians, recently called "Croatans," are descended from the "Lost Colony" is unsup-
ported by evidence and highly improbable.
44 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
produced fruit at Jamestown. His failure contained a lesson and
showed the place at which success would be found. His faith in the
expansion of English power was communicated to others, the pathetic
fate of his colony hung over the imagination of his countrymen,
and the cause of colonization was not forgotten.
Raleigh's misfortunes showed that planting a colony was a large
work and that it demanded the support of many people. He, indeed,
Co8 eration reau'ze<^ tms> an<^ *n I5&9 assigned to a group of " Associ-
ates " the right to establish a colony in Virginia. Among
them were ten men who were later connected with the Virginia
Company. One of them was Richard Hakluyt, who in 1584 presented
the queen with A Discourse of Western Planting, a little book of
arguments to show why Elizabeth ought to encourage colonies.
The appeal failed completely. English sovereigns never expended
money in founding or nourishing colonies in America. Among
Raleigh's "associates" was Thomas Smythe, a prominent merchant,
and either he or his son by the same name was treasurer of the Virginia
Company. In 1603 Raleigh was convicted of treason and the assign-
ment of 1589 became null.
The English opinion of Virginia at this time came from the reports
of Raleigh's captains and was influenced by the Spanish experience
in Mexico and Peru. The popular imagination added
Exaggerated mucfo ^o these already exaggerated impressions. A
Virginia.0 favorite comedy of the day, "Eastward Ho," gives the
following exposition of Virginia in 1605:
"Seagull. A whole country of English is there, bred of those that were left
there in '79 [1587]; they have married with the Indians . . . who are so in love
with them that all the treasures they have they lay at their feet.
" Scapethrift. But is there such treasure there, Captain, as I have heard?
"Seagull. I tell thee gold is more plentiful there than copper is with us; and
for as much red copper as I can bring I'll have thrice the weight in gold. Why
man, all their dripping pans ... are pure gold; and all the chains with which
they chain up their streets are massy gold, all the prisoners they take are fettered
in gold; and for rubies and diamonds they go forth on holidays and gather 'em
by the seashore to hang on their children's coats, and stick in their children's
caps, as commonly as our children wear saffron-gilt brooches and groats with holes
in 'em.
"Scapethrift. And is it a pleasant country withal?
"Seagull. As ever the sun shined on : temperate, and full of all sorts of excellent
viands ; wild boar is as common there as our tamest bacon is here ; and venison
as mutton. And then you shall live freely there, without sergeants, or courtiers,
or lawyers . . . Then for your means of advancement, there it is simple and not
preposterously mixed. You may be an alderman there and never be scavenger;
you may be any other officer and never be a slave. You may come to preferment
enough, ... to riches and fortune enough, and have never the more villany nor
the less wit. Besides, there we shall have no more law than conscience, and not
too much of either; serve God enough, eat and drink enough, and enough is as
good as a feast."
COLONY-PLANTING UNDER JAMES I 45
THE BEGINNING OF VIRGINIA
Various adventurous sea captains were on the American coasts
early in the seventeenth century, and they probably gave the impulse
which resulted in renewed efforts to people the country.
Two whose names stand out are George Weymouth and London
Bartholomew Gosnold. They offered their ships and their ^pf^
services and tried to get others to raise funds to send outhCom-
out colonies. They succeeded in enlisting the support pany.
of a number of gentlemen and merchants, and applied
to the king for permission to plant two colonies, r- one in the south,
where Raleigh's efforts were spent, and one in the north, in a region
whose resources of fur, timber, and fisheries had attracted the atten-
tion of Weymouth and others. The request was granted, and April 10,
1606, two groups of "adventurers," one resident in London and the
other in Plymouth, Bristol, and other towns, were authorized to plant
the "First Colony" and the "Second Colony" respectively. The
London Company, as the first group came to be called, was to plant
between the thirty-fourth and forty-first degrees of north latitude,
and the Plymouth Company between the thirty-eighth and forty-
fifth degrees ; but it was provided that when one colony was estab-
lished the other should not be placed within a hundred miles of it.
Each was to have jurisdiction over a region one hundred miles square,
fifty on each side, north and south, of its first settlement, and one
hundred into the interior. Various privileges were granted to each,
among them authority to open mines, grant lands, coin money,
defend themselves against intruders, and import certain articles for
seven years without duty.
Raleigh's grant said little about the government of the colony
he should plant, the inference being that this was a matter left largely
in the hands of the proprietor. " The grants of 1606 show
a better developed idea of a colonial system. The colony The King's
was to be a national undertaking, dependent, not on JJjJ^ai
parliament, but on the king. He created the charter Govern-
and reserved for himself the ultimate jurisdiction over ment.
the colonial government. He also issued "instructions,"
in which was established or modified the internal constitution of the
proposed colony. His direct representative was the superior council
of Virginia, consisting of thirteen members appointed by the king.
Virginia, as then conceived, was an immense domain in which could
be established eight seacoast colonies, each one hundred miles square.
The government now devised was to apply to the First and Second
Colonies, and probably to all others to be set up in Virginia.
Within the colony was to be a resident council of not more than
thirteen members, appointed temporarily by the superior council
46 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
in London. It was to choose its president annually, and its func-
tions were four : (i) to make ordinances in matters not touching life
and members, such ordinances to be in keeping with
Shtathr1* the " instructions" and with English law, and to be in
Colony. force until repealed by the king ; (2) to sit as a court of
justice ; (3) to appoint minor officials ; and (4) to exercise
the functions of local administration. The " instructions " also estab-
lished the Church of England and prescribed exile for persons preach-
ing against it. There was to be a Cape Merchant, or treasurer, to
receive the goods sent to the colony and to sell those sent home.
He was to administer the common store, to which every man's produce
should go for five years. The inhabitants were to have the personal
and property rights of British subjects, and trial by jury was not to
be denied.
The Second Colony, sent out by the Plymouth Company, sailed
August 12, 1606. It was a small expedition and was taken by the
Spaniards. The failure did not discourage the Company,
the°Kenne wno next ^esil:: sent One nun^re<^ an<^ twenty settlers to
bec< the mouth of the Kennebec. A bitter winter and other
hardships discouraged them, and they returned to Eng-
land in 1608.
The London Company, moving more slowly, sent forth a larger
number of adventurers. December 20, 1606, they sailed from London,
one hundred and twenty men, without women and children,
Settlers8* ^n three ships, The Sarah [Susan] Constant, The Goodspeed,
and The Discovery. Captain Christopher Newport, a seaman
experienced in the war against the Spaniards, commanded the expedi-
tion on the sea and was instructed to remain two months in Virginia
making explorations. He carried a mysterious sealed packet, to be
opened twenty-four hours after he made land, containing the names
of the all-powerful seven who should make the governing council.
Several men of high birth and pretensions were on board, and during
the four months the little fleet took to pass first the Canaries, then to
the West Indies, and thence northward to the Chesapeake, there was
much speculation and some heart-burning in anticipation of the assign-
ment of the coming honors. One man aboard was Captain John
Smith, a veritable soldier of fortune, without family connections
to speak of. He had real ability, but was probably aggressive and
boastful. He drew to himself a group of supporters, which displeased
Edward Maria Wingfield, a proud man of high birth, who charged
Smith with plotting mutiny, and got him put in irons for the rest of
the voyage. April 26, Old Style, they sighted the Virginia capes and
named them Henry and Charles after the two sons of their king.
Before them was Hampton Roads, and beyond that a great river
which they called the James. Seeking to reach it they were impeded
by shallows, till at last they found the channel close to a spit of land,
VIRGINIA SETTLED 47
which in gratitude they called Point Comfort. At last the sealed
packet was opened. The three captains of the ships, Newport,
Gosnold, and Ratcliffe, with Wingfield, Smith, and two others were
to be the council. Wingfield's ascendancy was complete ; he was
elected president, but Smith, though given his liberty, was not allowed
to sit in the council.
The colonists now divided into two parts ; one explored the river
and bay and the other proceeded to lay out a town. The site was a
peninsula thirty-two miles from the mouth of the James,
large enough for a town and some fields. It was connected
with the mainland by a narrow neck and was easily defensible.
Though lying low, it was as high as most of the bank up to that point.
The channel cut the southwest end and made a low bluff so that the
ships could be tied up to the shore. Here a fort was constructed,
with a church and a storehouse. In the rear of these was laid out
a little street along which huts were built. The town was named
Jamestown. June 15 the fort was completed, and the colonists felt
safe against the Indians. A week later Captain Newport returned
to England. He carried a quantity of pyrites which he took for gold.
He valued it so highly, that arriving on the English shore he dared
not leave his ship and proceed to London, lest the precious stuff be
stolen.
Virginia presented a fair appearance to the colonists. The great
oaks, pines, and cypresses, with grapevines as large as a man's leg,
showed the fertility of the soil. The great sturgeons
in the river, the luscious oysters on the rocks, mussels
i • • i n • i t
with pearls in them, nowers in the woods, strawberries
twice as large as those of England, and many other things filled with
admiration the imaginative gentlemen adventurers. They roamed
through the woods in ecstasy. Every new bird, every shady nook
carpeted with flowers, every fine view of river or grassy marsh ; brought
forth expressions of delight, as we may see from the writings of several
of the more bookish members of the colony. It would be interesting
to know what the laborers thought, who came to convert all this
forest beauty into patient, corn-growing fields. The Indians at this
time no longer looked on the whites with wonder. Spanish and
English ships had inflicted enough cruelty to place war in their hearts.
The Paspaheghs controlled the region and resented the intrusion at
Jamestown. No treaty was offered them, and they would have
destroyed the intruders had they found an opportunity.
The sultry August days brought disaster. Gentle George Percy
describes the situation with pathetic briefness. "The sixt day of
August," he says, " there died John Asbie, of the bloudie
Flixe. The ninth day, died George Flowre, of the swelling,
the tenth day, died William Bruster Gentleman, of a
\*ound given by the Savages, and was buried the eleventh day. The
48 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
fourteenth day, Jerome Olikock, Ancient [i.e. Ensign], died of
a wound. The same day, Francis Midwinter, and Edward Moris
Corporall died suddenly." Thus runs the account throughout
August, closing with this, "Our men were destroyed with cruell
diseases, such as Swellings, Flixes, Burning Fevers, and by warres;
and some departed suddenly; but for the most part, they died of
meere famine. ... It pleased God, after a while, to sende those peo-
ple which were our mortall enemies, [the Indians] to relieve us with
victuals, as Bread, Corne, Fish, and Flesh in great plentie ; which
was the setting up of our feeble men : otherwise we had all perished."
This fortunate succor came from Powhatan, who lived on the York
river, and from Indians south of the James, who were pleased to give
food for trinkets, Captain John Smith going to them for trade.
The starving settlers turned against Wingfield, who could think
of no better means of meeting the difficulties than to husband the small
store of food until help arrived from England. The
Ca* fcdnS °f resourcefumess of Smith now attracted attention, and he
John Smith. was admitted to the council. Soon afterwards this
body deposed the president and placed Ratcliffe in his
place. Smith then became the most active man in the colony. He
was sent out to trade with the natives, and besides securing food won
their respect, so that even the Paspaheghs became friendly. January 8,
1608, Newport, returning with supplies and no recruits, found the
colony safe, although the numbers were reduced to 40. He was ordered
by the Company to bring back a valuable cargo, and three months
were spent in getting lumber to fill his ships. The time should have
been given to clearing the forest for grain. As it was, when planting
time came only four acres could be put into cultivation. A hundred
would not have been too much. In August disease and famine reap-
peared and the population was reduced to 50. Then Newport reap-
peared, and precious time and strength must be given to the preparation
of his cargo. Under such circumstances the arrival of a "supply"
was a questionable benefit. In 1608 Smith became president, and
when all the other councillors died he would not appoint successors,
but ruled alone. The people accepted him, and in the spring of 1609
he got 40 acres into cultivation. He also erected better houses and
dug a well, at that place a work of a few hours. Although a physician
was among the colonists, the brackish river had for two years furnished
the drinking water.
In the autumn of 1609 Smith returned to England, and the winter
which followed was termed "the starving time." The population,
largely increased by recent arrivals, was reduced from
ingTime "*" 5°° to 6o* Some of the sufferers were tempted to canni-
balism, and one desperate man threw his Bible into the
fire, crying, "There is no God in heaven!" When Sir Thomas
Gates, a new governor, arrived in the spring he decided the experiment
GAINING EXPERIENCE AT JAMESTOWN 49
was a failure and embarked the whole company for England. Before
he left the river he encountered still another governor, Delaware,
with supplies and recruits. All returned to Jamestown, where the
situation became a little better.
In 1609 the government by council was abandoned and a governor
appointed with practically the authority of military law. Such a
man was Delaware, who was too mild to be a despot.
In 1611 he returned to England, remaining governor till
his death in 1618, and ruling Virginia through a deputy Abolished,
governor. In this capacity came Sir Thomas Dale,
1611-1616, as bitter a tyrant as ever held office in America. There
was much to excuse his harshness. He found on his arrival that no
crops were planted, although the planting season was past. The
men's chief occupation was bowling in the streets, the houses were
falling in pieces, and the Indians were defiant. He turned on New-
port, who had continually deceived England about the state of the
colony, pulled his beard in public, threatened to hang him,
and asked " wheather it ware meant that the people heere
in Virginia shoulde feede upon trees." He set the colo-
nists to digging sassafras roots and hewing cedar for the profit of the
Company. The spiritless inhabitants did not resist, but fled to the
woods : when he took them he burned them at the stake. For steal-
ing food some were hanged, and one was tied to a tree to starve.
The food was bad, either because the contractors cheated the Com-
pany, or because provisions spoiled in transit. There was much com-
plaint, and Dale devised a scheme of relief. He distributed
small lots of land to the people, and all who had come as
laborers were given one month of the year to raise food
for themselves. Another group, probably all who were not laborers,
were called farmers and given three acres of land each, for which
they paid to the company each year seven and a half barrels of corn
and one month's labor. It was exorbitant rent, but when men di-
rected their own labor they worked, as much in one day as formerly
in a week.
The large number of gentlemen adventurers who came to the colony
had a bad effect. They came hoping to find gold as Spanish gentle-
men had found it in Central America, but they were
nevertheless honestly desirous of building up the enter- P^e s
prise. Unaccustomed to labor they did not readily take
up the hard work of clearing the fields, and despair, disease, and
death found them an easy prey. Not used to superior authority
they turned to intrigue. On this group fell Dale like a thunderbolt.
He had no troops to enforce his orders, but his iron will served instead.
Hardened soldier that he was, he found it the most difficult task of his
life. When he left Virginia in 1 6 1 6 the days of illusion were passed and
the colonists realized that the chief thing was to develop the agri-
50 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
cultural resources of a fertile country. They then numbered 350 and
were well supplied with cattle and hogs. It was within this period
that the possibilities of tobacco were discovered. Virginia now had a
profitable money crop, great estates became possible, and the early
aristocratic impulses of the settlers might reassert themselves.
BETTER TIMES IN THE COLONY
Meanwhile the London Company cast off its early enthusiasm.
The public-spirited gentlemen who founded it soon ceased to con-
tribute to its support. Threatened with failure, its friends
theTcom "* attempted to make it a national trading company. The
paly.01 clergy lent their influence on missionary grounds, with
the result that the membership grew to 765, only 225 of
whom were of the gentry. A share cost twelve pounds and ten
shillings, and in 1612 the king permitted all important business to be
transacted by a majority of the stockholders. Now appeared at the
quarterly meetings a group in support of the king's ideas and a popular
party who declared that prosperity would not come to the colony
until self-government was granted. Such a suggestion was abhorrent
to James I, but the misery under the king's plan was evident and the
liberals triumphed in 1618. They were ably led by Sir Edwin Sandys,
ever the friend of liberal ideas.
Sir George Yardley, governor, arrived at Jamestown April 19,
1619, announcing the permanent end of common property and the
beginning of self-government. Each colonist was to
Government ^ave an assignment °f land — one hundred acres for
those who came before 1616 and fifty for those who came
afterwards. The laws were to be made by an assembly composed of
a governor and six councillors appointed by the company and two
representatives elected by each town, hundred, or plantation. The
governor and council had executive functions, assigned land, sat as
a high court of justice, and composed the upper house of the assembly.
The most honorable position in Virginia next to the governor was the
councillor. The representatives made the House of Burgesses, or
lower house. The assembly was to make laws not contrary to English
laws and subject to veto in England. In the main, this was the frame
of government for Virginia and the other royal colonies until the
revolution.
Tobacco was now worth five shillings a pound in London, but the
price fell rapidly. One man on cleared ground could raise, in 1649,
about 2000 pounds. Fifty acres of land, known as a
Annulled nea<^ r\g^t' was given to eacn adult immigrant who
settled in the colony, and fifty to a master for each serv-
ant. Sir Edwin Sandys, the Company's treasurer, worked inde-
fatigably to bring people to a country where wealth and liberty were
FALL OF THE COMPANY 51
promised, and his success was marked. But the court party intrigued
against him. They convinced the king that Virginia was a nest of
sedition, and he set himself to defeat the reelection of the treasurer.
"Choose the devil if you will," he said to the stockholders, "but not
Sir Edwin Sandys." This warning was too plain to be mistaken, and
the liberal faction elected the Earl of Southampton, as progressive as
his predecessor. James's suspicions were not allayed, and many
advisers incited his anger, among them the Spanish minister, Gon-
domar, who resented the intrusion of the settlement into what he
considered Spanish territory. In 1623 one of his tools published a
paper called "The Unmasking of Virginia," bitterly attacking the
company and the colony. James sent a biased commission to Virginia
to investigate, and on its report brought suit to annul the charter.
All the past misfortunes were laid at the door of the London Company,
and June 16, 1624, the Company fell, Virginia passing into the hands
of the king. He probably intended to undo the liberal reforms, but
he died within a year, and Charles I, more friendly than his father,
allowed them to continue. Thus the first law-making assembly es-
tablished in America remained as a model for the colonies not yet
created, and liberal government under royal supervision became
firmly rooted in our life.
The governors sent by Charles were no worse than those sent by
the Company. They had frequent quarrels with the assembly, which
became the defender of colonial rights against the royal
prerogative. Sometimes the council sided with them, Governors,
and in 1635 it even deposed Governor Harvey, who tried
to lay taxes without an act of assembly and to remove officials by his
mere word. He was promptly restored by King Charles, who re-
sented the unmaking of a governor. But the king was greatly beset
by his own enemies, and vacillated from party to party. He soon
sent a liberal governor, and then changing again, sent in 1642 a sup-
porter of the royal prerogative, Sir William Berkeley, destined to
rule long in Virginia. Berkeley was a stout aristocrat and a sup-
porter of the king's prerogative, but he was honest, and his adminis-
tration was a period of economic prosperity.
Planting the first permanent colony cost the English stock dearly.
When it ceased to exist in 1624 the London Company had expended
200,000 pounds, equal to $5,000,000 in American values of to-day,
and from this large expenditure the return was very slight. In the
same period it sent to Virginia over 14,000 persons, nearly 13,000
of whom died from exposure and disease. But in spite of this waste
of money and life the first lessons of colonization were learned for the
benefit of colonies to be established in the future, and Virginia re-
mained a permanent home of white men.
Two Indian wars fell heavily on the colony within the early period
of its existence, one in 1622 and another in 1644. Each marked an
52 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
attempt of the natives to save their land from the occupation of the
strangers. Before the first of these attacks relations with the savages
were peaceful, owing in the first instance to the exertions of Captain
Smith and after that to the good will of Po what an, head chief of a
confederacy which included at least thirty-four tribes. His good will
was much influenced by his daughter Pocohontas, who probably saved
the life of Smith, made many visits to Jamestown, and finally married
Rolfe, one of the colonists. In 1618 Powhatan died, and his able
brother, Opechancanough, who disliked the English and wished to
expel them before it was too late, began to plot war. In March,
1622, the tribes generally went on the warpath, and swept through
the outlying plantations with a trail of blood. Nearly 400 persons
perished, and the planters who survived the first attack fled to the
older settlements. They were compelled to leave their cattle behind,
which, with their homes, were destroyed. As soon as the spring crops
were planted the whites divided in bands and took a terrible vengeance.
For twenty-two years there was peace. But Opechancanough, at last
the head chief, only waited an opportunity. In 1644 there was civil
war in England, and he thought the expected moment was at hand.
Old and blind as he was he acted with energy, and in two days over
300 settlers were slain. Again the whites took up arms, and in 1646
the aged head chief himself was taken and killed. In -this struggle
the savages lost heavily and were forced to make a treaty by which
they retired from the region between the James and the York rivers.
Thenceforth tidewater Virginia had peace.
THE SETTLEMENT or MARYLAND
In 1609 the London Company's jurisdiction was fixed at 200 miles
north and south of Old Point Comfort, and it was to extend westward
. through this region to the Mississippi. The Jamestown
DivTded settlement was not thought to have jurisdiction over all
this area; for in 1619 the Company granted privileges
to the Pilgrims from Leyden, which, but for the unfavorable voyage
of the Mayflower, would have resulted in a coordinate colony near
the Delaware. With the fall of the Company, 1624, all Virginia again
became the king's, and soon afterwards he cut off from it two great
proprietary provinces. One, lying on the south of Virginia proper,
he gave to Sir Robert Heath, 1629, who did not improve it, and the
other was given to George Calvert, Lord Baltimore, who thus became
the founder of Maryland.
Calvert was a member of the London Company and a
tohLordant favorite witn tne km£- In 1625 he announced himself
Baltimore. a Catholic, resigned the principal secretaryship of state,
and gave himself up to colonization. His first attempt
was in Newfoundland, but it failed through the cold climate, and he
MARYLAND PROJECTED 53
turned to Virginia, asking in the first instance for a grant of the
lands between the James river and Albemarle Sound. To this
request the friends of Virginia objected, and he was satisfied with a
grant north of the Potomac, extending as far as the fortieth degree of
latitude. To the colony, the charter of which was signed June 20,
1632, the king gave the name Maryland, in honor of his queen, Hen-
rietta Maria.
By the Maryland charter a government was created less liberal
than that of the London Company. The model on which it was
formed was the County Palatine of Durham, in northern
England. The proprietor, Baltimore, was to have in
the colony the same authority as the Bishop of Durham Maryland,
had in the county, of whom the old motto of law ran,
Quicquid Rex habet extra, Episcopus habet intra. Thus the proprietor,
besides having possession of the land, was the head of the adminis-
trative, judicial, and military functions. The legislative function had
no place in the system in force in Durham, and in this respect the
Maryland system was more liberal ; for it provided that the proprietor
might make laws in keeping with those of England "with the advice,
assent, and approbation of the freemen or the major part of them or
their representatives." The inhabitants were thus to have a share in
law making, but the proprietor could have the initiative and might
exercise a veto. By the charter the church of Maryland was to con-
form to the laws of England, and the right to nominate clergymen was
reserved to the proprietor. He was to hold his estate at only a nom-
inal rent, and without taxes to the royal treasury.
George Calvert, first Lord Baltimore, died as his charter was about
to be signed, and Maryland passed to his son, Cecilius, a wise and
liberal-minded man. He proceeded with the work of
colonization, and in October, 1633, sent two ships with
twenty gentlemen and about two hundred laborers to
make the first settlement. With them went his brother, Leonard, as
governor. He and most of the gentlemen were Catholics, and most of
the laborers Protestants. In a country as strongly anti-Catholic
as England it behooved the Calverts to be tolerant, but there is no
reason to think that the liberty of conscience which they granted in
Maryland did not arise from their sense of justice and liberality.
At any rate, at a time when Virginia drove out non-conformists and
Massachusetts persecuted Roger Williams, Maryland was the home
of religious freedom. Toleration attracted to Maryland people of
varying religious belief. Unfortunately, they were not so liberal as
the proprietor, and when strong enough began to persecute one an-
other, until civil war at last appeared in the colony.
English Catholics suffered much from the laws against their faith,
and it was thought that they would gladly seek an asylum in America.
They were fined for not attending the established church, keeping
54 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
arms in their houses, educating their children abroad, maintaining
Catholic schoolmasters, and converting Protestants to Catholicism.
They might not be legally married by their own clergy,
Catholics6 serve as executors, or be buried in their own church-
Migrate? yards. Fines were collected from them persistently : even
James I, who had sympathy for their faith, took thirty-
six thousand pounds a year in this way. For these reasons Catholics
were deeply discouraged. But when Baltimore's charter was at
length signed, King James was dead, and the English church seemed
tending toward Catholicism. Laud was establishing high church
practices and harrowing the Puritans, and the new king was giving
willing approval. So hopeful were the Catholics of better times in
England that the expected emigration did not occur, and Baltimore,
who wished to see the colony grow, was the more willing to receive
settlers of other faiths.
The first colony entered Chesapeake Bay late in February, 1634,
giving thanks to Providence for bringing them through many
storms. They were struck with admiration for the
^t^sV Potomac, "in comparison with which the Thames seemed
Mary's. a rivulet." Near its mouth was a tributary which they
called St. George : nine miles up its course they laid out
a town and called it St. Mary's. The site was occupied by the Indians.
Mindful of Captain Smith's experience in Virginia the Marylanders
resorted to trade, and for some axes, knives, cloth, and hoes purchased
the village. The neighboring savages were weak, and, suffering much
from the Susquehannas, who lived near the mouth of the river which
now bears their name, received the whites gladly, and were converted
to Christianity by the Jesuits. Leonard Calvert took up the work of
establishing his colony in an orderly manner, profiting by Virginia's
experience. The Indian fields were put in corn and tobacco and
other land was cleared, the location selected was dry and healthy, and
land was assigned individually from the first. The delusion of gold-
hunting never troubled the colony. The result was that the first
year a shipload of corn could be sent to New England to exchange
for salt fish. Maryland was planted without a "starving time."
February 26, 1635, the colonists held an assembly. They were
not authorized to do it by the proprietor, but thought the charter
gave them permission. They sent a number of laws to
encePoTthe England, where Baltimore disallowed them because he
Assembly. intended to have the initiative in law making. Three
years later he sent a body of laws which were submitted
to a second assembly. He now learned how little the right of initiating
law is worth when the representatives are in a bad humor ; for the
assembly was overwhelmingly against his code. Baltimore was a
wise ruler and would not press his point. He authorized his brother,
Governor Calvert, to allow the assembly to make laws as they desired,
SOCIAL CONDITIONS 55
to be in force till he should pass on them in England. The proprietor
tried again in 1649 to introduce a system of law favorable to his pre-
dominance, and failed again. In 1650 Maryland was given a legis-
lature with two houses, one composed of representatives and the other
of the councillors and persons specially summoned by the governor.
Baltimore learned in another way that the feudal ideas of the
Stuarts could not be grafted on society in America. In pursuance of
his grant he created manors consisting of one thousand
or more acres. The lord of the manor was authorized
to hold manor courts, to which his tenants might come system
and vote under his direction. The tenants consisted of
English laborers who might soon become farm owners.. They felt
the impulse to freedom which inhered in a society the natural basis of
which was the ability to work. They took control of the lord's courts,
held local popular meetings, arid in a short time the Maryland manors
disappeared.
The Jesuits themselves felt the force of democracy. They were
much interested in the experiment and used the opportunity to ac-
quire large tracts of land, — some from the proprietor
and some from the Indians, who trusted them. They checked1"*
began to talk of the supremacy of the church law over the
proprietor and assembly. Lord Baltimore was a true Catholic, but
he was not intolerant, and he realized that if the Jesuits obtained
control, public opinion in England would demand the destruction of
this cherished asylum for his fellow-believers. He sent an agent to
Maryland to check the extreme Catholics there. The Jesuits re-
sented this and talked of excommunication. The proprietor then
took decisive action. In 1641 he issued new regulations to control
the granting of land, and one provision was that lands should not be
granted in mortmain; that is, to religious societies. In the same
sagacious spirit he sought to restrain religious disputation between
the two religious groups, and in 1643 he went so far as to send notice
to New England that all creeds would be protected in Maryland.
All these efforts brought slight increase of population. Protestants
preferred to settle in one of the Protestant colonies and Catholics
were not going to America in large numbers. The most notable ac-
cession was the removal of more than one thousand Puritans from
southern Virginia to escape Berkeley's strict regulations.
Virginia did not relish the loss of what she considered her territory
north of the Potomac. In 1630 she sent one cf her chief citizens,
William Claiborne, to England to try to defeat Balti-
more's plans. He did not succeed, and returned to Vir-
ginia in a mood to make trouble. He lived at what is isiand.
now Hampton, Virginia, but was engaged in the fur trade
on the northern shores of the Chesapeake, and had a trading station
with a fort and a small garrison on Kent's Island, within Baltimore's
56 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
grant. Governor Leonard Calvert held that it ought to fall under
Maryland jurisdiction, and the terms of the charter supported him.
But Claiborne held that as it was settled under Virginia authority
before the charter was issued it ought to remain under that juris-
diction. When, therefore, Calvert called on Claiborne to submit
to Maryland, the latter refused and Virginia supported him. Rival
fur traders stirred up feeling at St. Mary's, and August 5, 1635, they
seized one of Claiborne's pinnaces. The Virginian was a high-spirited
man and retaliated, blood being shed on both sides. Neither party
cared to go further, and for nearly three years there was no more
trouble, Claiborne continuing most of the time to trade in Maryland
in defiance of Calvert. He was confident of his position, and in 1637
went to England on business. Governor Calvert then sent a force
which surprised Kent's Island by night and forced its inhabitants to
submit to his government. The following year Claiborne was at-
tainted of treason by the Maryland assembly, and one of his followers
was hanged for having committed manslaughter in one of the recent
encounters. At the same time royal commissioners decided that the
disputed island belonged to Lord Baltimore. Claiborne submitted
unwillingly and bided his time. He had lost his island, but he found
a means of annoying Maryland.
From 1630 to 1650 Englishmen were divided into a king's party and
a parliamentary party. The old court party of the London Company,
still intriguing for the restoration of their charter, favored
Maryland the king, who in 1630 sent John Harvey to rule Virginia
PoUtks'by0 in the interest of the r°yal prerogative. The former
Virginians. supporters of Sandys and Southampton were still active
and were very strong in Virginia, where Claiborne was
one of their leaders. In 1635 they deposed the governor and sent
him to England with charges of misconduct. Lord Baltimore
was a supporter of the king and a friend of John Harvey. He used
his influence with Charles and got the deposed governor restored ;
but in 1639 the king felt the need of the liberal party and replaced
Harvey by Wyatt, whom he removed in 1641 to make room for Sir
William Berkeley, a thorough royalist. The popular party in Vir-
ginia followed these movements closely and identified Baltimore
with their enemies. When, therefore, the king and parliament were
at last at war, 1642, they thought the time had come to strike Balti-
more in Maryland. Although they were not willing to oppose Charles
in Virginia, they were willing to urge the Puritans of Maryland to
strike at his friend, the proprietor of that province. Claiborne saw
in it an opportunity to recover his property, and in 1645 landed on
Kent's Island and tried to get the inhabitants to join him in an attack
on the proprietary government. They would not follow him, not
because there was no discontent in Maryland, but because they did
not want to take up Claiborne's quarrel.
MARYLAND CONTROVERSIES 57
This discontent came to the surface in 1644 when Edward Hill,
member of the popular Virginia party, appeared in Maryland to per-
suade the Puritans to return to their old homes south of
the James. They did not heed him, but persuaded him to ?vil
espouse their cause against the Catholics. They or-
ganized a Protestant assembly, and elected Hill governor,
in the absence of Governor Calvert in England. But at this juncture
Calvert returned, and finding his province in revolt got a body of
soldiers from his brother royalist, Governor Berkeley, and made
prisoners of Hill and his assembly. Six months later Governor
Calvert died. He tried to pass the governorship to a Catholic and
royalist, but affairs in England were ordered otherwise.
In England the king's cause was now desperate, and astute Cecilius
Calvert was looking for means of appeasing Parliament. The vacant
governorship was just the opportunity; he gave it to
William Stone, a Virginia liberal and a Protestant, and
began to think of laws for religious liberty. Stone's first Baltimore,
assembly passed the famous Toleration Act of 1649, pro-
tecting all who professed faith in Jesus Christ. It was honestly
meant by the proprietor, but it was needed in order to protect the
Catholics under a government thoroughly Protestant. Baltimore's
reversal of policy created disgust among his old English friends, and
Charles II in exile ordered that he surrender his government because he
adhered to the Parliamentarians. This was an impotent thrust, and he
used it as a good argument when his enemies tried to get Parliament to
seize the province on the ground that it was a nest of Romanism.
In 1651 Parliament, now completely under Cromwell, sent com-
missioners — one of them being the ubiquitous Claiborne — to reduce
to obedience Virginia, Maryland, Barbados, Antigua,
and Bermuda. The islands submitted at once, Virginia
made no resistance, and in 1652 Maryland also submitted, tants.
Baltimore's property rights were maintained, but he lost
the government, though Stone remained in office under the parlia-
mentary government. He was friendly to the proprietor, and in
1654 tried to get him recognized as head of the government under
Parliament. This aroused the resentment of the commissioners, and
Claiborne appeared with a Virginia army, deposed Stone, appointed
commissioners in his stead, and disfranchised the Catholics. A new
assembly was strongly Puritan and toleration was cast to the winds.
The deposed governor appealed to force, the Catholics and some
Protestants fighting under him for the proprietor and liberty of con-
science. He marched against the Puritans in 1655 and
sustained a complete defeat at Providence. The Vir-
ginians now felt that they might reunite Maryland to
their own colony. They sent a petition to England urging that the
proprietary government be abolished and that the two colonies be
58 THE FIRST ENGLISH SETTLEMENTS IN THE SOUTH
made one. Baltimore's wise concessions to Puritans now bore fruit.
He completely defeated his enemies; and the government forced a
settlement which left him in control of Maryland according to his
charter and placed the Act of Toleration beyond question. With
this settlement ended Virginia's interference with Maryland affairs
and her hopes of recovering that province. At this time Baltimore's
colony contained 8000 inhabitants on both sides of the Chesapeake
as far north as the mouth of the Susquehanna.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The best general authorities are : Charming, History of the United States, vol. I
(1905) ; Osgood, The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, $ vols. (1904-1907);
Tyler, England in America (1904) ; Avery, History of the United States and Its
People, 7 vols. (1905 — ) ; Doyle, English Colonies in America, 5 vols. (1882-1907) ;
Fiske, Old Virginia and Her Neighbors, 2 vols. (1900) ; and Eggleston, The Beginners
of a Nation (1897).
The leading original sources are : Records of the Virginia Company of London,
2 vols., Miss Kingsbury, ed. (1906) ; Hakluyt, Principall Navigations, 16 vols.
(Edinburgh ed., 1885-1890) ; Narratives of Early Virginia, Tyler, ed. (1907),
contains the best of Smith with portions of other writers ; Calendar of State Papers,
Colonial Series, America and West Indies, vol. I (1860) ; Acts of Privy Council,
6 vols. (1908-1912); Brown, Genesis of the United States, 2 vols. (1891); Hening,
Statutes at Large of Virginia, 13 vols. (1823) ; Archives of Maryland, 29 vols.
(1889 — ); and Macdonald, Select Charters (1899).
On the settlement on Roanoke Island see : Ashe, History of North Carolina,
vol. I (1908) ; Hawks, History of North Carolina, vol. I (1857) ; Strachey, Travaile
into Virginia (Hakluyt Soc., 1848) ; and Edwards, Life of Raleigh (1868).
Contemporary works on early Virginia are : Captain Smith, True Relation (1608) ;
Ibid., General History of Virginia (1624), both in Arber's edition of Smith's Works
(1884) ; and minor writers in Narratives of Early Virginia (1907). The best
histories of Virginia are those of Robert Beverley (1722), William Stith (1747),
John D. Burke (1805), and Charles Campbell (1847). Other important works
are: Brown, First Republic in America (1898); Ibid., English Politics in America
(1901) ; Beer, Origins of the British Colonial System (1908), excellent for the British
side of the colonial movement; Bruce, Institutional History of Virginia in the
Seventeenth Century, 2 vols. (1910); Ibid., Economic History of Virginia in the
Seventeenth Century, 2 vols. (1896) ; Ibid., Social Life of Virginia in the Seventeenth
Century (1907).
On Maryland see : Mereness, Maryland, as a Proprietary Province (1901) ; Bozman,
History of Maryland, 2 vols. (1837) ; Browne, History of Maryland (1893) ; Neill
Founders of Maryland (1876) ; Ibid., Terra Mariae (1867) ; Latane, Early Relations
of Virginia and Maryland (Johns Hopkins Studies, XIII, 1895) ; Steiner, The
Beginnings of Maryland (Ibid., XXI, 1903) ; and Narratives of Early Maryland,
Hall, ed. (1910), contains Alsop's Character of Maryland, Hammond, Leah and
Rachael, and other early tracts. An important source is the Fund Publications
of the Maryland Historical Society, No. 34 of which contains The Calvert Papers.
For Independent Reading
Fiske, Old Virginia and Her Neighbors, 2 vols. (1900) ; Eggleston, The Beginners
of a Nation (1897) ; Browne, George and Cecilius Calvert (1893) ; Bruce, Social
Life of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (1907) ; and Ashtpn, Editor, Adventures
and Discourses of Captain John Smith (1883), taken from Smith's own writings.
CHAPTER IV
THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
THE PLYMOUTH COLONY
WHEN James I was driving non-conformist ministers from their
livings, two of the victims, Richard Clifton and John Robinson, were
received at Scrooby, in Nottinghamshire, by William
Brewster, living in a manor house of the brother of Sir
Edwin Sandys. The region is the cradle of religious
reform; for not only did the New England Pilgrims origi-
nate here, but ten miles northeast of Scrooby is Epworth, whence
issued a century later the founder of the great Wesleyan movement.
Brewster, a man of stout heart, a retired diplomat, and a strong
Puritan, gathered his neighbors under his roof to hear the words of
Clifton and Robinson; and in 1606 was organized a separatist con-
gregation, with Robinson for pastor. Self-control, plainness in dress,
honesty of speech, and absolute faith in the Bible were some of the
features of its faith. The pastor was a fellow of Cambridge, wise in
business matters, and capable of ruling others by his sweetness and
strength of character. An antagonist called him "the most learned,
polished, and modest spirit that ever separated from the Church of
England."
The congregation encountered persecutions immediately. The
members were watched day and night and, as Bradford later wrote,
"some were taken and clapt up in prison . . . andye In Leyden
most were faine to flie and leave their howses and habi-
tations, and the means of their livlihood. Yet these and many other
sharper things which afterwards befell them, were no other than they
looked for, and therefore were ye better prepared to bear them by
ye assistance of Gods grace and spirite." Fleeing one by one, the
members at length arrived in Amsterdam and then went to Leyden,
where they found employment and set up their church, their pastor
going with them and sharing their sorrows. At the end of ten years
their industrial condition was not improved, and their children were
becoming Dutch in speech and ideas. They longed for a home in an
English land and applied for a grant in Virginia. February Tfae charter
2, 1620, a patent issued from the London Company per-
mitting them to settle a plantation and to govern it by laws of their
own in keeping with the laws of 'England. Sandys got his friends to
59
60 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
urge the king to promise that the settlement should not be molested ;
but James would only wink at the enterprise. This satisfied the
Pilgrims, as we may now call them; for they reflected that "a scale
as broad as the house floor" would not keep James to his promise.
Not all the congregation could leave Ley den. Some were held back
by family bonds, others were too old or too young, and others could
The Prefect not sel1 tlieir Pr°Perty for m°ney. Thus it happened that
the majority remained in Leyden and the pastor stayed
with them. By request, William Brewster went as leader. Robin-
son's preaching in Leyden had drawn to his congregation fugitives
from many parts of England, and the result was that many of the
emigrants were not of those who fled from Scrooby, and some were
not members of the congregation. Seventy London merchants ad-
vanced 7000 pounds to fit out the expedition ; and it was agreed
that the net earnings should go into a common fund for seven
years and then be divided among the shareholders. Ten pounds
was the value of a share and each immigrant was allowed one
share for services.
September 6, 1620, after many delays, the Pilgrims, 102 in number,
set sail from Plymouth for Virginia, as they thought, in a hired ship,
the Mayflower. November 1 1 they sighted land at Cape
Cod. Bearing southward to pass it and come to the
Delaware river, where they designed to settle, they en-
countered shoals and drew back, coming to anchor in the
harbor of Provincetown. The captain of the ship refused to continue
his journey southward, alleging the dangers of the sea. After five
weeks of exploration they took the ship to Plymouth, a place marked
and named on Captain John Smith's map. The place had deep water
for the ships, a stream of fresh water for drinking, and some cleared
fields where Indians had once grown corn. December 16 (26, New
Style) they brought the Mayflower to the place and began to build
huts for the passengers.
A hard winter and much suffering now followed. Hunger, cold,
and illness played their parts relentlessly, and by the arrival of spring
hardly fifty of the colonists were alive. Of the eighteen
wives who came in the ship only four survived. The
seasoning process was as cruel here as in Virginia. But
the spirit of the survivors did not flag. By hard work they raised a
small amount of corn in 1621 and came to the autumn with hopeful-
ness. But the arrival of thirty-five colonists without food necessitated
a regime of half-rations. In the spring of 1622 came sixty-five more,
and the whole settlement was in dire want until the corn ripened.
During these distressing months the fish and game were abundant,
but the colonists were agriculturalists and had not learned to take
them. Here, as in Virginia, it took time to develop the keen resource-
fulness of the American frontiersman.
THE MAYFLOWER COMPACT 61
Plymouth, outside the bounds of the London Company, could not
profit by the original patent. But in 1621 it received a grant from
the council for New England, which was created by the
king in 1620 with authority to settle the coast from the
fortieth to the forty-eighth degree of latitude. The terms
were not satisfactory, and in 1630 a more valid grant was secured.
The colonists desired a charter like that of Massachusetts Bay, but
the gift was denied them. Without a frame of government from the
crown they were therefore thrown on their own initiative. The re-
sult was the "Mayflower Compact," signed November 21, 1620,
by each male adult except the servants and two hired seamen. It
created ua civil body politic" on democratic lines but fully sub-
servient to the royal authority. In the absence of a charter it
was the basis of civil government in Plymouth until the colony
was united with Massachusetts in 1691. The first governor, John
Carver, died, in 1621, and his successor, William Bradford, was an-
nually reelected, until his death in 1657, with the exception of five
years, when he refused to serve.
The relations of the colonists to the Indians proved fortunate.
Pestilence had swept away those in the immediate neighborhood. In
the spring of 1621 Samoset, from the island of Monhegan,
arrived at the town crying " Welcome !" He had lived ^ the8
for some time with English traders and proved useful to i^ans*
the colonists. He brought to them Squanto, another
Indian, who taught the whites to raise Indian corn and to fertilize
their fields with fish. In 1621 a treaty was made with Massasoit,
chief of the Wampanoags, and it resulted in fifty years of peace with
the Indians south and east of Plymouth. To the west were the Narra-
gansetts, who sent a war challenge, a bundle of arrows tied in a rattle-
snake's skin. Bradford promptly returned the skin stuffed with bul-
lets, and the threatened danger vanished. In 1623 the Indians to the
northward planned to exterminate the whites whom the adventurer
Weston had settled at Weymouth. The whites asked Plymouth
for aid, and Captain Miles Standish, with the fighting men of that
colony, marched against the savages and taught them to respect the
white man's arms. After that Plymouth had peaceful relations
with all the Indians.
Another difficulty overcome by Bradford's good sense was the
communal form of labor, adopted for seven years at the instance of
the merchants who promoted the colony. Lack of in-
terest marked the system, and the colony seemed on the g°0™™on
verge of destruction when in 1623 Bradford assigned Abandoned,
a parcel of land to each family for use. The result was
good, and individual effort returned with the prospect of individual
gain. The fur trade, well managed, proved profitable, and from the
proceeds the debt to the company in England was paid off.
62 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
In church government the Pilgrims were thoroughgoing Separa-
tists. Pastor and elders were elected by the adult males of the con-
. gregation. Religious ceremonies were rigorously es-
Ideeaglous chewed, and for a time even marriages and funerals were
conducted without religious forms. Attendance at meet-
ing was compulsory on members and non-members. Theology ruled
the minds of the people and the orthodox believed they saw on every
hand revelations of the divine will. In 1623 drought threatened to
destroy the crop and a day of humiliation and prayer was observed ;
after which came a copious rain which saved the harvest. In grati-
tude a Thanksgiving Day was set apart for the autumn. There had
been, however, a day of thanksgiving in 1621.
The growth of Plymouth was slow, for the soil was not fertile and
but little remained from the annual product after the food of the colony
was set aside. There was no staple crop, as tobacco in
ofXpiymouth Virginia, from which a large money return could be ex-
pected. Immigration was naturally from the Separa-
tists, who came slowly. Thus it happened that in 1624 the population
was 180, and in 1626 it was 300. By this time a desire to disperse and
settle on the better lands to the northward could not be restrained,
though Bradford did his best. Men abandoned their house lots as
they went, and Duxbury and Scituate sprang into thriving existence.
Each had its own civil and ecclesiastical government like that of
Plymouth ; and for common affairs of each kind there were represen-
tative assemblies. To be admitted to citizenship in a town or mem-
bership in a congregation required a vote of the existing citizens or
members, as the case might be.
Meanwhile, much attention was given to colonizing other parts of
New England. The Plymouth Company of 1606 was reorganized
in the Council for New England, 1620, and received a
F th?r ^JeW valuable fishing monopoly. Sir Ferdinando Gorges and
Settlements. Captain John Mason, king's men and churchmen, were
the most active members. They made large plans which
they had not the means of executing. In 1623 a settlement was made
at Rye, in New Hamsphire, only to fail in 1626. In 1627 an attempt
was made at Dover and another at York, while fishing stations were
established at Pemaquid Point and on Monhegan Island. Saco and
Biddeford soon followed. Other small settlements were Cape Anne,
1623, Hull, 1625, Salem, 1625, "Merry Mount," near Quincy, 1625,
and Buzzard's Bay, 1627. Most of them were mere fishing stations,
and none gave evidence of prosperity. The Council of New England
could offer them little aid. After granting most of what is now New
Hampshire and Maine to Mason and Gorges and smaller tracts to
other persons, it asked the king in 1635 to annul its charter, saying,
"what remains is only a breathless carcass." From this time we hear
little more of the council. Most of the lands over which it had juris-
THE PURITAN MIGRATION 63
diction had been granted to former members and the council, who now
held of the king directly.
THE MASSACHUSETTS BAY COLONY
The Pilgrims were Separatists, but the Puritans, who founded
Massachusetts, wished to remain in the established church, although
they thought to reform its doctrines. They were es-
pecially earnest against bishops, whom they considered p^ftan^
a relic of popery ; and they resented the wearing of sur- Migration,
plices. They were very numerous, and Laud, Bishop of
London and supporter of Charles I in his arbitrary government,
began to harry the Puritan clergy out of their offices. Thus arose
the impulse of the Puritan migration to New England, a place where
prelates would not distress and religion would be preserved in Puritan
integrity. Yet other motives were present. The New World offered
wide industrial opportunity, and it seemed to be possible to found a
government there free from the taint of absolutism which then alarmed
many Englishmen. The Puritans were generally thrifty and practical
business men and liberals in their political ideas. Among them, also,
were many thoughtful and well-educated men who could give reasons
for the doctrines they held. Of this class was John Winthrop, a
well-to-do landowner, a former student but not a graduate of Cam-
bridge, a lawyer, and a wise man of affairs. He would have been a
leader of any community in which he lived.
In 1628, before the Puritan migration was planned, six Englishmen,
among them John Endicott, secured from the Council of New England
a grant of land bounded on the north by the headwaters of the Merri-
mac and on the south by the source of the Charles and stretching
westward to the Pacific. They were authorized to es-
tablish fisheries, trading stations, and agricultural settle- JJ"^
ments, and were named the Massachusetts Bay Company. ^ay charter.
In 1629 the king confirmed the grant and gave the grantees
civil jurisdiction within the limits of the grant. Endicott with about
forty others arrived at Naumkeag in September, 1628, to plant the
first town. He found there the remnant of the Cape Anne settlement
and the two parties settled together amicably, changing the name of
the place to Salem. Endicott and his associates were Puritans, but
up to this time their enterprise had no religious significance. In 1629,
however, the number of associates was enlarged, and among the new
members was Winthrop. The struggle between parliament and crown
was already begun, and many on the former side felt that tyranny
would certainly triumph and were willing to escape betimes from its
grasp. In August, 1629, twelve leaders of this group made the Cam-
bridge Agreement, pledging themselves to emigrate to Massachusetts
if the company would transfer the government entirely *to the settlers.
64 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
The company accepted the proposal, and the transfer made, John
Winthrop was elected governor by those who proposed to go with
him. June 12, 1630, he arrived at Salem with eleven
Transferred! slliPs and 9°° settlers- Here, he found, was much dis-
couragement and some suffering, and he decided to make
his chief settlement elsewhere. He selected a site at the mouth of the
Charles and called the place Boston. But it was too small for such a
large number of settlers, and the colonists dividing into
Settled bands settled seven other towns from Salem to Dorchester.
They did not escape sickness and hunger, and by the
end of the first winter 200 had died. But the governor strove hard
to provide food and was able to bring the colony through the winter
without serious discouragement. After that the growth was rapid,
and in 1643 the total population was over 16,000. But the outbreak
of war between parliament and king made it necessary for every
Puritan to remain in England, and from that time the migration to New
England was slow.
Soon after the colony was settled there arose serious difficulty in
regard to its government. The charter intrusted authority to the
governor, the assistants of whom there were to be not more
tnan ei£nteen> and the freemen, but it did not define
tem Evolved. tne P°wer of each. The same difficulty appeared in other
colonies, and in them, as in Massachusetts, it had to be
worked out gradually into a practical solution. Trouble arose when
Winthrop, a man of strong personality, began to act in important
affairs on his own initiative. He lent powder to Plymouth, established
trading stations, and erected fortifications at Boston. Finally, acting
with the assistants, he levied a tax to pay for fortifications at New-
town. Watertown refused to pay, claiming that only the freemen
might lay a tax. Here was defiance in the infant state, and Winthrop
was not the man to tolerate it. The townsmen were called before
him and withdrew their protest. But their cause was good and their
action led to reform. Next year, 1632, the general court, the as-
sembly of all the freemen, enacted that each town should elect two
delegates to advise with the governor about taxation. This hardly
restrained the stout will of the governor, and in 1634 three delegates
appeared at the general court from each of the eight towns and se-
cured the adoption by that body of a fundamental reform. Hence-
forth, of the four courts held each year according to the charter, one,
attended by all the freemen, was to elect governor, deputy governor,
and assistants, and the others, composed of delegates from each town,
was to make laws, grant land, and transact other important public
business. At first both assistants and delegates sat together, but this
was changed in 1644, when a bicameral system was adopted and the
assistants became in reality an upper house. Winthrop and many
others regretted these changes, for they believed government should
PURITAN UNIFORMITY 65
rest with the upper class. But the popular party was strong and did
not cease its efforts until in 1644 it defeated Winthrop's reelection.
But in 1646 he was again successful, and retained the governorship
until he died in 1649. We shall not understand Massachusetts his-
tory ii we do not remember that the colony was long ruled by the ideal
of an aristocracy of virtue.
To insure the supremacy of the virtuous it was enacted in 1631 that
none but members of a church should be freemen. By this means
the individual congregations, under the influence of their
ministers, regulated the suffrage. Joining the church
thus became the means of enfranchisement. Although
this practice must have secured the disfranchisement of the most
worthless characters, it also excluded those who for conscience sake
would not join a church, and those who held other than the Puritan
faith. But such people were not desired in the colony. The settle-
ment was planned as a Puritan commonwealth, and if non-Puritans
came they might remain as long as they were quiet, but without the
suffrage. If they sought to spread another faith, they must be sent
away. A word must be said for the men who made such laws. The
fathers of many of them remembered the days when "Bloody Mary"
burned Protestants at Smithfield, and the religious wars of France
were only recently extinguished, while a similar struggle in Germany
was then in its worst stage of horror. Believing in the doctrines for
which so many lives had been surrendered, they felt justified in safe-
guarding it in the New World. Massachusetts was not established as
a home for toleration, but as a well-defended fortress of the Puritan
faith.
There was frequent necessity for enforcing uniformity in the early
years of the colony. European Protestantism at the time was beset
with schism, and it was natural for the same symptoms to
appear in America. They were repressed sternly, and the *°%f*™~
victims went back to England with loud complaints of j^ views,
intolerance. But one of the dissenting ones would not
return. Roger Williams, destined to found Rhode Island as a genuine
home of tolerance, was a protege of Sir Edward Coke, the famous
jurist. He had a brilliant career at Cambridge, but refused to take
orders because he would not support the Establishment. In 1631
he became minister at Salem, then preached at Plymouth, and at
length returned to Salem. He preached the separation of church and
state, declared that an oath was only to be enforced morally, and said
that it was a sin to worship according to the forms of the established
church. His rigid literalness led him to assert that the soil belonged
to the Indians, from whom alone the whites could acquire title.
All this would have aroused the authorities at any time, but in
1635 it occasioned especial alarm. Excluded schismatics return-
ing to England had pronounced the colony a nest of separatism,
66 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
and the Privy Council had in 1634 stopped ten ships about to sail
until their passengers agreed to conform with the Prayer Book.
Meanwhile, a commission headed by Laud was appointed
under°Sus- to suPerv^se tne colonies in America. The general court
picion. 1 °f Massachusetts, much alarmed, took steps to fortify the
harbors, but in a short time the tide turned. Good di-
plomacy had thrust the danger aside, but no one knew when it would
return. It was not a time for preaching such radicalism as Williams's
in the colony. The Puritans, claiming that they held the true Eng-
lish faith, were accustomed at this time to assert rather stoutly their
accord with the English Church, although, as a matter of fact, they
had no bishop and paid not the slightest attention to the British
hierarchy.
Williams's views inevitably elicited a response, and one of those
polemic conflicts ensued for which the age was noted. The defender
of orthodoxy was John Cotton, of Boston, and under his
Uam^Ban" Pr°ddings Williams took a still more radical position,
ished. He began to criticize other ministers ; he advised his own
flock not to affiliate with other churches, and when some
of them ignored him he excommunicated them. This was too much,
even for Salem, and it turned against the minister, who felt impelled
to resign. He was now summoned before the general court, and re-
fusing to recant he was ordered into exile in October, 1635. As
winter was approaching, he was permitted to remain until spring on
condition that he did not preach his tenets. He seems to have made
no promise in the matter, but when it was known in January that he
was instructing a group of twenty persons, perparations were made
to send him to England. Learning of this he escaped across the snows
to the Narragansett Indians, who received him kindly. Here, outside
of Massachusetts, he planted the settlement of Providence. He was
followed by a small number of friends.
A more important division was occasioned by Mrs. Anne Hutch-
inson. Of the best social rank in Boston, she had her following
among the influential class. She was distinguished for
Hutchison mental acumen and piety and showed much ability in
discussion. Her first achievement was to gather a num-
ber of women to whom she explained sermons. From that she ad-
vanced to the teaching of her own doctrines, and soon she had a large
following, among whom were many men of importance. Then the
orthodox became alarmed and began to warn the faithful against
what they declared were her errors. Attack and counter-attack led
to recrimination and intrigues, in which religion and politics were
intermingled. At length a council of ministers assembled but did not
openly condemn her doctrines. In 1635 young Sir Harry Vane
arrived in Boston and became an adherent of her faith. He was ex-
ceedingly popular, and in 1636 was elected governor. Thus strength-
MRS. ANNE HUTCHINSON 67
ened, Mrs. Hutchinson's party had probably a majority in Boston,
but in the other towns the orthodox side was stronger. In 1637, when
the echoes of the controversy reached all parts of the colony, a synod
of ministers convened and laid down eighty-nine points of orthodoxy,
all in repudiation of the teachings of Mrs. Hutchinson, which were
clearly Antinomian. Against an utterance by the ministers the poli-
ticians dared not act, and now the weaker of the new sect began to de-
sert it, among them Rev. John Cotton, of Boston, who had once been
friendly to the new ideas. In the same year Governor Vane was de-
feated for reelection by Winthrop, who took a conservative attitude
in the dispute, and a short time afterwards the rejected candidate
left Boston for England. In November, 1637, tne situation came
before the general court, which decided that only one form of
religion should exist in the colony, and declared that the newer
should go.
The affair ended with a trial which seems to moderns a judicial
horror ; but it was held in conformity with the usage of the English
parliament when it sat to investigate a great and danger-
ous matter of state. Mrs. Hutchinson was summoned
before the court to explain her doctrines. Had she been
cautious she might have baffled her opponents ; but having a sharp
tongue she compromised herself by her replies. Being asked, "How
do you know that it is God that did reveal these things to you and not
Satan ?" she replied, "How did Abraham know that it was God that
bid him offer his son?" "By an immediate voice," said one of the
court. "So to me by an immediate revelation," was the rejoinder.
This was enough. The Puritan held the words of the Bible for the
highest authority and had no tolerance for those who claimed special
revelations. Winthrop, presiding over the court, put the question :
Shall Mrs. Hutchinson be banished from Massachusetts ? and only
two votes were in the negative. When she asked why she was banished,
the governor replied : " Say no more. The court knows wherefore and
is satisfied." Her leading followers were fined or disfranchised. In
the following spring she was brought before her own church to be dealt
with as a church member. Broken in spirit by imprisonment and
isolation, she recanted the most extreme of her doctrines, saying they
arose from "the height and pride of her spirit." But this availed
nothing. Several of the most pious ministers present denounced
her as a liar and she was formally excommunicated. With her family
she went southward to Narragansett Bay, and when, four years later,
she and her family were massacred by the Indians the saints of Massa-
chusetts took it as a judgment from heaven.
The next important protest against dogmatic uniformity in Massa-
chusetts came from the Quakers, and it was sternly repressed. The
death of Winthrop in 1649 and Rev. John Cotton in 1652 left Endi-
cott, a narrower-minded man, in control. In 1656 came to Boston
68 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
two Quakers, women, who felt it their duty to "bear witness" in
that town. They were sent away, but eight others immediately ap-
peared only to be driven back, also. This caused much anxiety
among the ruling class, who considered Quakerism espe-
Ouakersin cially dangerous. Accordingly, letters were sent to the
Boston. other New England colonies urging that laws be passed
for the exclusion of the pestiferous heresy. Connecticut,
New Haven, and Plymouth gave favorable replies, and laws were passed
to keep the new sect out of their bounds. Massachusetts passed similar
acts, but as they were continuously violated she finally enacted that
if any banished Quakers returned to the colony they should suffer
death. Immediately William Robinson, Marmaduke Stevenson,
and Mrs. Dyer, wife of the secretary of Rhode Island, appeared in
Boston. They were ordered to depart, but at once came back and
were sentenced to be hanged. The two men were executed, 1659;
but Mrs. Dyer was reprieved at the last moment when her son offered
to take her to her home. In 1660 she returned and suffered martyr-
dom. Other colonies forbade the Quakers to preach, as Virginia and
New Netherland, but it was only Massachusetts that put them to
death. In striking contrast was the course of Rhode Island, which
made no restriction on liberty of speech.
THE SETTLEMENT or OTHER NEW ENGLAND COLONIES
Four settlements, at Providence, Portsmouth, Newport, and War-
wick, each made by religious refugees from Massachusetts, make up
the early colony of Rhode Island. The first was es-
tablished by Roger Williams and a small group of fol-
F^unded. lowers in 1636 on lands granted by the Indians. The
second was made by Mrs. Hutchinson and her fol-
lowers in 1638, the third by a portion of her followers who left Ports-
mouth in 1639 and settled along the shore of the excellent harbor of
Newport, and the fourth was planted in 1638 by Samuel Gorton, an
insurgent from Massachusetts who could not stand the turbulent
regime of Providence. There was much discussion among the settlers,
as was to be expected from men whose very existence was religious
dissent ; but out of it came a spirit of democracy which left a lasting
impress on the settlements. They began without charters and had
no other form of government than what they established by their
own agreement. In 1643 Roger Williams, on a visit to England, got
an act of incorporation under the government of the Long Parliament,
confirming to the people of the four settlements their lands with the
right to govern themselves in their own way. Under this act a
common system was organized, and it remained the authority for
Rhode Island and Providence until in 1663 a more regular charter
was issued by the king.
SETTLEMENTS IN CONNECTICUT 6$
Meanwhile, the lands south of Massachusetts and west of Rhode
Island had attracted settlers. On the Connecticut, Dutch trading
forts had already been planted where Hartford and
Wethersfield later stood, and one object of the English JS™ of'
was probably to save this rich valley from the control Connecticut
of New Amsterdam. The migration was begun in 1636
when Rev. Thomas Hooker and a large part of his congregation at
Cambridge sold their lands and moved in a body to the upper Con-
necticut valley. Other groups from Dorchester, Watertown, and
Roxbury soon followed, those from the last-named town settling at
Springfield, which proved to be within the bounds of Massachusetts.
Out of this movement sprang English settlements at Hartford, Wind-
sor, and Wethersfield, and later at other places in Connecticut. The
newcomers did not drive out the Dutch, but in many ways made life
uncomfortable for them. The river towns of Connecticut in 1639
adopted a written form of government with a governor, assistants,
and a law-making general court composed of deputies from the towns.
The suffrage was to be regulated by the towns. This, it will be seen,
was but a copy of the Massachusetts system.
The upper river towns were not planted before still another enter-
prise was launched at the mouth of the Connecticut. In this region
the Earl of Warwick held a large tract of land from the Council of
New England. In 1631 he transferred it to Lord Saye and Sele,
Lord Brooke, and others, who sent out a colony under John Winthrop,
Jr. At the mouth of the river it settled the town of Saybrook, and its
territory was known as the colony of Connecticut. For many years
it languished through lack of funds.
A third enterprise was the colony of New Haven, planted in 1638
by Theophilus Eaton and Rev. John Davenport. It was a strong
band of immigrants, and they came with great hopes of
making their port the commercial metropolis of the region. Established
But various disasters intervened, and for a time prosperity
came slowly. In 1646 they built a ship and sent her away with a
cargo worth 5000 pounds, but nothing further was heard of her. Tradi-
tion says that once afterwards she appeared as a phantom ship and
suddenly disappeared as she seemed about to enter the harbor.
The settlement was founded without charter or land grant, and the
inhabitants proceeded to constitution-making of their own will. Tak-
ing the Bible as guide and law book they transformed the
congregation into a body politic to rule in civil as in eccle- ^ave^Gov
siastical affairs. Thus none but church members should eminent,
vote, and a committee of seven members was provided with
authority to determine who should be admitted to church member
ship and consequently to the franchise. This oligarchical govern-
ment remained in force until in 1662 New Haven was merged into
the Connecticut Colony, when that enterprise got a charter from
70 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
Charles II. But we must not forget that narrow as the basis of gov-
ernment was in New Haven, as in other New England colonies, it
was an honest and beneficent government in most of the affairs of
life. Its sole severity was in requiring a rigid observance of Puritan
practices, and to most of the inhabitants this was not a hardship.
The advance of the whites along the coast alarmed the Pequot
Indians, who lived in the central part of the present state of Con-
necticut. The origin of the trouble does not clearly ap-
War, 1637. Pear> but tlie settlers were convinced that the times
demanded a most signal chastisement. Massachusetts
lent a hand, and in 1637 a combined force of whites from Massa-
chusetts and Connecticut, with 280 Indian allies, ancient foes of the
Pequots, surprised the enemy in a fort near the Rhode Island bound-
ary line and of the 400 men, women, and children within it not more
than five escaped alive. The Pequots were then pursued vigorously.
Overtaken in a swamp near New Haven, another great slaughter
occurred, and the result of the two engagements was the complete ex-
tinction of the Pequot tribe as such. It was grim dealing, but it gave
the whites peace from the Indians for many years.
Meanwhile the coasts of New Hampshire and Maine had been
dotted with fishing and trading villages which gradually grew into
agricultural towns. In some cases they received fugitives
sWreand15" ^rom tn^ ren'gi°us persecutions in Massachusetts. These
Maine.n settlements were usually made under the protection of
Sir Ferdinando Gorges and Captain John Mason, who
held grants for nearly the whole region, although some were direct
from the Council of New England. In 1635 Mason obtained con-
firmation of a grant for the region between Salem and the Piscataqua
as his own property, and called it New Hampshire. The region be-
twepn the Piscataqua and the Kennebec was confirmed to Gorges and
called Maine. Massachusetts had a claim to most of the former,
for her charter fixed her north boundary at an east and west line
running three miles north of the source of the Merrimac. She did
not act violently, but when Mason died (1635) and his heirs left the
New Hampshire towns to shift for themselves, she absorbed them one
by one, giving protection in exchange for allegiance. In 1647 Gorges
died and Maine was left without a head. The towns tried for a while
to maintain a general government of their own, but they were very
weak, and much disorder appeared. Now Massachusetts realized
that her hour was come. Assuming the aggressive, in 1652 she ran
her northern boundary in keeping with her own claim, and extending
the line eastward to the ocean, secured the coast towns as far north as
Saco Bay. The weak settlements to the north of the line remained
independent for six years, when they also submitted to Massachusetts.
In all these towns the government was organized on the regular New
England plan ; but not all of them were of the congregational faith.
NEW ENGLAND UNION 71
The Pequot war seems to have been the first occasion of a desire
for union among the Puritan colonies. Connecticut made such a
suggestion in 1637, but Massachusetts raised the question
of boundaries, and it was impossible to find a satisfactory j
basis of cooperation. In a year or two alarm was felt lest federation,
the Dutch seize the Connecticut settlements, and the sug-
gestion was repeated, but with the same results. In 1642 Connecticut
renewed the request, alleging a general Indian league to crush the
whites. Then Massachusetts began to relent, and in 1643 the de-
sired league was formed without reference to boundaries. To it were
admitted the colonies of Massachusetts, Plymouth, Connecticut, and
New Haven. New Hampshire and Maine were not taken in because
they were unlike the leagued colonies "in their ministry and admin-
istration," and Rhode Island was left out because the inhabitants
were "tumultuous" and "schismatic."
The Constitution of the Confederacy provided for a firm and per-
manent offensive and defensive league, the management of which was
placed in the hands of two commissioners from each of
the four colonies. These commissioners by a majority
vote of six were to settle questions of war or peace, quotas
of men and arms, contributions for the general fund, and division of
the spoils gained in war. Contributions were to be paid by the in-
dividual colonies in proportion to population, and the confederacy
was not to interfere in the local affairs of a colony.
The confederation was in operation for forty years. It did not
remove all the causes of conflict between the colonies, but it lessened
them. It stood the test of the terrible war with King Philip, and only
fell to pieces when the early dangers it was formed to meet were passed.
Although phrases in the constitution seem to indicate that the f ramers
hoped to build up a permanent federal state, the confederacy was, in
fact, only a league for self -protection. Between the large colony of
Massachusetts and her small neighbors there was too much latent
jealousy for permanent cooperation. The latter were vigilant lest
they lose some of their power, and the requirement that six of the eight
commissioners should assent to business was an expression of this
feeling. On the other hand, Massachusetts resented the checks the
constitution put upon her. She declared that she was forced to as-
sume a disproportionate part of the common burden. In 1653 the
commissioners decided to raise troops for an expected war against the
Dutch, and apportioned the levies of troops so that Massachusetts
should furnish two-thirds of them. The Bay Colony did not relish
fighting a war to protect the people of Connecticut, and persuaded
itself that the war was not necessary. The requisition was accordingly
ignored in words which strongly remind us of the language in which
South Carolina justified nullification many years later. There were
cases of friction which made it clear that it was futile to expect the one
strong government to yield itself to the direction of three weak ones.
72 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
NEW YORK UNDER THE DUTCH
The history of New Amsterdam, as the Dutch called New York,
begins with the exploration of Henry Hudson, an Englishman in Dutch
employ, in 1609. In the Half Moon, a " fly-boat " manned
Hudson. by eighteen or twenty men, he skirted the coast from
Newfoundland to Virginia, searching for a northwest
passage. He entered Delaware Bay, but turned back when he ob-
served shoals. Northward 125 miles he came to a broad harbor which
he entered safely. The water was very salt, and he thought it might
indicate the long-sought passage to other seas. Following its course
he sailed onward, past beautiful hills and rich plains, until at last he
was halted by shallows at what is now Albany. From that point a
small boat proceeded eight leagues, but only proved that no open sea
lay beyond.
This exploration revealed to the Dutch the value of the Hudson
river. With an excellent harbor at its mouth and long water com-
munication to the interior of the country, it was apparent
Block611 ^at ^ possessed great advantages in the Indian trade.
From 1 6 10 their traders began to frequent the river,
among them Adriaen Block, a man of much enterprise. In 1613 his
ship was burned, but he built another in which he began to explore
the New England waters. He visited Long Island Sound, the Con-
necticut river, Block Island, which bears his name, and the coast as
far as Nahant. For his services he received for three years the mo-
nopoly of the fur trade betweer parallels 40° and 45° north latitude.
For trading purposes Manhattan Island was of supreme importance,
and by 1620 it was the center of a fair trade.
In 1621 the government of Holland established the Dutch West
India Company, a trading enterprise, and authorized it to spoil the
Spaniards and to settle colonies in Africa and the New
Netherland World. It had no special reference to the Hudson river
Settled. region, but that section naturally attracted attention, and
in 1623 a small settlement was made on Manhattan Is-
land. The enterprise was confided by the company to Peter Minuit
(pronounced Minnewit) , the governor, who with five councillors was
the sole governing body. They were supplemented, however, by a
schout-fiscal, who arrested and prosecuted delinquents, and a secretary
who represented the company's financial interests, and between these
and the governor and council much friction occurred. All these
officers were appointed by the company, and popular suffrage was
not granted. The settlement was 'called New Netherland, and the
town on Manhattan Island was New Amsterdam. The boundaries of
the province were indefinite. Soon after his arrival Peter Minuit
purchased Manhattan Island from the Indians for goods worth $24,
EARLY DUTCH RULE 73
and began to erect a fort with a mill and large houses for the com-
pany's business.
New Amsterdam grew slowly, for its chief business was the fur
trade, and agriculturalists were not attracted. In 1629 the company
tried to promote the settlement of the interior by adopting
a system of large landed estates. It was provided that system*0
any member of the company who in four years should carry
to the colony fifty families at his own expense should have a large
tract of land over which he should have extensive civil and criminal
authority under the title of Patroon. He should also have on his
estate the monopoly of weaving and some exclusive trading privileges.
It was thus definitely proposed to establish a feudal system of land-
holding like that of Holland. To encourage the patroons the com-
pany agreed to furnish them with as many negroes slaves as were
desired. Under this system the valuable lands around New Amster-
dam and on the Hudson were quickly absorbed by the most influential
members of the company.
Peter Minuit's administration ended in 1632, and he was succeeded
by Wouter van T wilier, who had married a niece of the great patroon,
Kiliaen van Rensselaer. He received much opposition
within the colony, and his peace was also disturbed by the Confusion
encroachments of the New England men in Connecticut S£?fil™
.. °. I wilier and
and the threats of Virginians who resented the presence Kieft.
of the Dutch in the Delaware. He was glad to retire
from his unhappy position, and regarded with complacency the
troubles of William Kieft, his successor, who arrived in 1638. Under
him occurred a war with the Indians, who fought to save their hunt-
ing ground from the advance of the whites. The easy-going Dutch
were slow to fight, and only Kieft's insistence brought the council to a
declaration of war. In battle the settlers were not efficient, and at
last Kieft called in Captain John Underbill, a soldier of fortune from
New England, who took prominent part against the Pequots. He
collected 150 soldiers, surprised and destroyed an Indian village at
Strickland's Plains, and of the 500 inhabitants only eight IndianWar
are said to have escaped. In this war the settlers built a
wall across the lower end of Manhattan Island to protect their fields
and houses. Its memory is perpetuated in the name of Wall Street.
In 1646 peace was made with the savages, but already the colony
was in dire distress. The inhabitants of New Amsterdam were about
400, and among them a visitor heard eighteen languages. They were
discontented, and assailed Kieft bitterly. As sole ruler with the Coun-
cil he was held responsible for all the evils that came, and the truth isr
he was not a man to exercise despotism benevolently. In 1647 he
was succeeded by Peter Stuyvesant.
The new governor began by declaring that he would rule as a father
over his children. He promulgated many ordinances against intern-
74 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
perance, but they were not enforced, and it was charged that he
himself received money to wink at their infraction. He required the
Indian traders to have licenses from the governor, which
Stayvesant Proved an advantage to his private purse. But he dared not
of his own power levy taxes, and out of this feeling came a
step in constitutional development. He asked the people to elect
eighteen men from whom he and the Council selected nine to advise
with them in the government, their successors to be chosen by them-
selves and the governor and council. Thus was created the Nine
Men, destined to be a thorn in his side. But the desire for self-govern-
ment was not satisfied, and at length a leader of the liberals appeared
in Adrian van der Donck, president of the Nine. In 1649 ne went to
Holland with a petition, asking the government to take the colony
out of the hands of the Company and give it just laws. He also carried
a severe arraignment of Stuyvesant, whose irritable tem-
Liberaldf0r Per an(* covetousness 8ave ample grounds of complaint.
Government. ^n x^52 n^s eff°rts succeeded so far that municipal privi-
leges were granted to New Amsterdam, but the governor
was allowed to appoint the officials. His despotism was nowise
lessened by the creation of this body of subordinates. The next year
an attack by the English seemed imminent, and Stuyvesant per-
mitted delegates from the towns and villages to meet to provide means
of defense. But the assembly took up the state of the colony instead,
and sent a memorial to , the governor, severely arraigning the existing
system. An exchange of arguments followed, in which the governor's
aversion to popular government was made very plain, and the result
of the agitation was nothing. The existing despotism continued until
the end of Dutch control, 1664.
Religious bigotry was added to the stout old governor's love of
power. He hated the Lutherans, Independents, and Baptists, and
issued a proclamation that no public religious meetings
Pers^cu S should be held except those in accordance with the Dutch
tions. Reform Church. The ordinance was often evaded, and
there were some notable cases in which its violation was
severely punished. The worst was that of Robert Hodshone, a
Quaker, who, for preaching at Hemstead, Long Island, was sentenced
by the governor to two years of hard labor. When he refused to work
he was beaten on three successive days until he fell to his feet. Then
taken before the governor he would speak when told to hold his tongue,
for which he was hung up by his hands and beaten until his back was
raw. This also was repeated until the popular mind sickened of it.
At last the governor's sister interceded, and Hodshone was allowed
to go out of the province. Spite of such severities the dissenting
churches in New Netherland grew stronger.
From conflicts with the settlements around New Amsterdam the
efforts of Stuyvesant were drawn to the protection of his boundaries
DISSATISFACTION IN NEW NETHERLAND 75
north and east. The Delaware Bay, as well as the Connecticut
river, were both within the charter limits of New Netherland, though
neither was settled by an agricultural colony. To the
former came in 1638 fifty Swedish settlers under Peter T*16
Minuit, formerly governor of New Amsterdam, planting settlements
near the site of Wilmington the town of Christina.
At that time Sweden was a leading factor in the Thirty Years'
War, and her colony was not disturbed. But the war ended in 1648,
and the Dutch within a few years made plans to seize the intrud-
ing settlements. In 1655 Governor Stuyvesant went against them
with a largely superior force and easily compelled their submission.
Sweden was in no position to retake what was lost, and the incipient
colonial establishment came to an end.
With the English on the Connecticut Stuyvesant had less success.
The Dutch trading fort at Hartford, Fort Good Hope, was completely
isolated by planting the English settlements on the
river; but»it remained undisturbed, flying the Dutch du^^om
flag and taking what share it could of the Indian trade Connecticut,
until 1654. In that year, war between Holland and
England being in progress, the colonists seized Fort Good Hope,
and with that Dutch possessions in New England passed out of exist-
ence. Governor Stuyvesant's patriotism suffered a severe shock
in this calamity. For several years the English settlements had been
moving westward along the shores of Long Island Sound as far as
Greenwich and throughout the eastern half of Long Island, — addi-
tional evidence of the humiliation of Dutch power. Into The English
the New Netherland settlements themselves English- onLong
men penetrated and became a large part of the element island,
in opposition to Stuyvesant's despotic rule.
The situation in the colony invited an attempt at conquest by the
English, and the Connecticut colonies were anxious to have it made
by the New England Confederacy ; but Massachusetts
held back. Then appeal was made to England, and in 1654
the government was induced to undertake an expedition, New
but peace with Holland was made before it could arrive. Netherland.
Now followed ten years of quiet, during which New
Netherland continued to offend against the British navigation
laws. The English had never given up their claim to the whole
coast and the Dutch colony was within the formal bounds of both
New England and Virginia. Why should it continue to defy British
power? The answer came in 1664 when the king, Charles II,
granted it to his brother, the Duke of York, together with jurisdic-
tion over New England itself.
The Duke acted vigorously. Colonel Richard Nicolls was appointed
his deputy-governor, and August 18, 1664, arrived before New Amster-
dam with three vessels of war and an adequate body of soldiers. He
76 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
was joined by men from Connecticut, and word came that Massa-
chusetts would also send aid. At the same time the Englishmen on
Long Island were arming, and throughout the Dutch villages them-
selves was apparent a determination to help the English in wiping
out the rule of the Dutch West India Company. Stuyvesant was in
a rage. He ordered all the citizens to work on the fortifications,
and was determined to fight to the last. But the burgomasters
of the town realized the impossibility of defense, and when Nicolls
by letter offered the Dutch all the liberties of Englishmen, with inter-
course with Holland, they asked to see the letter. Stuyvesant tore
it into bits and said he would rather "be carried out dead " than yield
to the men around him. He ordered the guns of the fort to open
fire, but he was led away from the ramparts before they could be
discharged, and August 29 the town was surrendered. A short
time later the forts on the Delaware capitulated, and the English
flag floated from Florida to Maine.
•
EARLY RELATIONS OF THE COLONIES WITH ENGLAND
By an old principle of English law alt land in the kingdom not
otherwise granted belonged to the crown. Under it the king created
fiefs at will and gave the grantees authority to establish
Jhe . local governments. When the American continent was
depe^don added to the English domain it fell under this rule. Its
the King. lands became king's lands, and were subject to his disposal.
It was, therefore, the crown and not parliament which
created the American colonies and gave them their forms of govern-
ment. Having created the colonies, the crown, acting through
the Privy Council, provided the rules under which they continued to
exist, and supervised them in such ways as were compatible with the
charters. Matters of trade, however, were ever near to the British
heart and were jealously maintained by parliament, so that in regard
to colonial trade parliament was supreme. In most other things
the colonies must look to the crown.
The king contributed little to the support of the colonies. Virginia
was planted by a company of private individuals, actuated partly
by philanthropic and partly by commercial purposes.
Maryland was the enterprise of the Calverts, who wished
to found a home for Catholics and incidentally to establish
a great and permanent landed estate. New England was settled
by groups of Puritans who wished to have happy and prosperous
homes in which they might worship in their own faith. To each
enterprise the king gave his sanction and his blessing, but nothing
more. American colonization in its earliest days was not an enter-
prise of the crown.
When the colonies were safely established 'and it was seen that
BRITISH COLONIAL SUPERVISION 77
another England was growing up beyond the sea, the king began
to take a larger interest in them. Virginia fell into his hands when
the charter was annulled in 1624, not so much because
James I had a definite desire to direct the colony as Colonies to
because he hated the liberal government established by un(j>erlRoyal
the company. His successor, Charles I, came to see that Oversight,
some kind of colonial supervision ought to be provided,
and appointed a commission, with Laud at its head, to make laws
for all the colonies, regulate their religion, appoint their judges, and
remove their governors when advisable. In the turbulent times
then existing the commission did nothing. In 1643 the Long
Parliament took up the subject and appointed the Earl of Warwick
governor over all the colonies. He was to be assisted inoperative
by seventeen commissioners with wide governing powers. Commis-
Much occupied with other things Warwick seems sions-
to have done little in regard to colonial affairs, which after the
restoration were placed in the hands of a Council for Foreign Planta-
tions, an advisory body reporting to the Privy Council. It showed
little capacity, and in 1675 was superseded by a standing committee
of the council, known as the Lords of Trade, which proved far more
industrious. Most of the colonies, it must be remembered, existed
under charters, which might be forfeited if certain conditions
were violated. It was the duty of Lords of Trade to
inform themselves of colonial affairs and report to the
king a violation of a charter. Over a royal colony the
Lords had a larger jurisdiction. They prepared, or saw, the instruc-
tions to a royal governor, passed on the laws of an assembly in a
royal province, advised the king whether or not such laws should be
allowed, and had a large influence in the appointment of officials.
Over the colonies generally they had a broad supervision, informing
themselves about the conditions of trade, making suggestions for the
better execution of the navigation acts, interfering in disputes between
colonies, and, in short, seeking to evolve a system of colonial adminis-
tration which should embody the best results for both the colonies
and the British nation. In 1696 the Lords of Trade were reorganized
into the Commissioners of Trade and Plantations, a board independ-
ent of the Privy Council. As the English cabinet developed, the
functions of commissioners decreased. Finally in 1768 a colonial
secretary of state became the head of colonial affairs.
The Puritan revolution in England, by overthrowing Laud's
power, probably saved the colonies from an attempt to The
bring them under an active dependence on the crown, colonies
It left New England undisturbed, and dealt gently with and the
Virginia, where Charles II had been proclaimed king, and Puritan
with Maryland, whose Catholic proprietor was after a
while confirmed in his rights. The parliamentary party, in fact,
78 THE SETTLEMENT OF NEW ENGLAND
was too busy with its troubles in England to interfere with government
in the colonies. But it adopted the navigation ordinances of 1651,
which had, if enforced, a decided influence on their commerce.
In a struggle against a king who laid taxes arbitrarily the English
merchants took a leading part, and they had a corresponding influence
in the revolutionary government. It was to please them
Navigation tkat parliament undertook to make the colonial trade
inure to the benefit of English traders. Sporadic laws
of the same import had existed for years; but the recent
wide growth of the colonies gave them a new significance, and a new
law was made. It provided: (i) that no goods produced in Asia,
Africa, or America, including the colonies, should be brought into any
British port in any but English owned and manned ships ; (2) that
no European goods should be taken to England or the British posses-
sions in any but English ships or in the ships of the country in which
the goods were produced ; (3) the coasting trade in British dominions
should be limited to British ships; and (4) no salted fish, oil, or
whale products should be brought into the British dominions that
were not taken in English ships — nor should they be exported in any
but English ships. The plain purport of this law was to limit the
English and colonial trade to English channels for the profit of English
merchants. The restriction, however, was not enforced. Foreign
vessels could not be excluded from colonial ports without efficient
police service, and so lax was the execution of the law that we may
wonder if it was intended to apply to the colonies.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The most commendable general authorities are : Channing, History of the United
States, vol. I (1905), new and reliable; Osgood, The American Colonies in the Seven-
teenth Century, 3 vols. (1904-1907) ; Avery, History of the United States and Its People,
7 vols. (1904 — ), valuable for its maps ; Tyler, England in America (1904) ; Doyle,
English Colonies in America, 5 vols. (1882-1907) ; Palfrey, History of New England
during the Stuart Dynasty, 3 vols. (1858-1864) ; Chalmers, Political Annals of the
American Colonies (1780), an old work based on original sources, but still useful;
Fiske, Beginnings of New England (1889) ; Ibid., The Dutch and Quaker Colonies,
2 vols. (1899) ; Hildreth, History of the United States, 6 vols. (1849-1852) ; Bancroft,
History of the United States, 10 vols. (1834-1874) ; Lodge, Short History of the English
Colonies (1902), a useful manual; and The Cambridge Modern History, vol. VII
(1903)-
The important general collections of sources are the British government's Cal-
endars of State Papers, Colonial Series, America and West Indies, 1574-1701,
14 vols. (1860-1910), and Force, Tracts, 4 vols. (1836-1846). On New England,
see: Records of Plymouth, 12 vols. (1855-1859); Records of Massachusetts
Bay, 5 vols. (1853-1854): Collections (1792 — ) and Proceedings (1791 — ) of the
Massachusetts Historical Society and the Proceedings of the American Antiquarian
Society (1849 — ); Records of the Colony of Rhode Island, 10 vols. (1856-1865);
Colonial Records of New Haven, 15 vols. (1850-1890) ; Collections and Reports
of the Connecticut Historical Society ; Records of th& Colony of New Haven, 2 vols.
(1857-1858) ; Documentary History of the State of New York, 4 vols. (1849-1851) ;
Documents Relative to the Colonial History of New York, 14 vols., and index (1853-
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 79
1861) ; Records of New Amsterdam, 7 vols. (1897) ; and the Collections, ist series,
5 vols., and Publication Fund Series (37 vols.) of the New York Historical Society.
See also Poore, Federal and State Charters, 2 vols. (1877), and MacDonald, Select
Charters (1899).
Contemporary narratives are: Bradford, Plimouth Plantation, begun in 1630,
discovered in England in 1855, best edition by W. C. Ford, 2 vols. (1912); MourCs
Relation, by Bradford and Winslow, sent back to England in the "Mayflower";
Winslow, Hypocrisy Unmasked^; and Winthrop, History of New England. The
history of separate colonies is given in Belknap, History of New Hampshire, 3 vols.
(1784-1792); Hutchinson, The Colony of Massachusetts Bay, 3 vols. (1764-
1828); Barry, History of Massachusetts, 3 vols. (1855-1857); Goodwin, The
Pilgrim Republic (1888) ; Richman, Rhode Island, its Making and Meaning, 2 vols.
(1902) ; Arnold, History of Rhode Island, 2 vols. (ed. 1894) ; Trumbull, History of
Connecticut, 2 vols, (ed. 1898) ; Atwater, History of New Haven (ed. 1901) ; O'Cal-
laghan, History of New Netherland, 2 vols. (ed. 1855) ; and Brodhead, History
of the State of New York, 2 vols. (1872).
For Independent Reading
Fiske, Beginnings of New England (1889) ; Ibid., Dutch and Quaker Colonies,
2 vols. (1899) ; Adams, Massachusetts, its Historians and History (1893) > Straus,
Roger Williams, the Pioneer of Religious Liberty (1894) ; Goodwin, The Pilgrim
Republic (1888) ; Twichell, John Winthrop (1891) ; and Eggleston, The Beginners
of a Nation (1897).
CHAPTER V
COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER THE LATER STUARTS, 1660-1689
CHARLES II AND THE COLONIES
WHEN called to the throne Charles II was in no position to continue
his father's strong policy either at home or in the colonies. He
accordingly left the government of the latter in statu
quo, and was content to increase the means of making
Colonies them yield to him a revenue. To Connecticut and
Undisturbed. Rhode Island he gave charters confirming their former
liberal institutions, and they were .so satisfactory that they
served as state constitutions until 1818 and 1842 respectively.
The former was also notable in that it united Connecticut and New
Haven in one government. For a time the Massachusetts charter
seemed in danger of annulment because menlbers of the Anglican
church could not vote, but negotiation led to a compromise by which
the general court enacted that all persons of property and good char-
acter should have the right to vote. But since a regular minister
must vouch for an applicant's good character it is likely that the
spirit of the law was nearly as restrictive as ever.
Virginia and Maryland, loyal enough, had nothing to fear in the
nature of constitutional change, but they were powerfully affected
by the king's desire for money. Heavy British taxes were
Mag"iandnd lev*ed on tobacco, already selling at ruinously low prices.
Burdened. That which was used in England paid a tax of one shilling,
ten pence a pound, and that which was reexport ed paid
ten and a half pence. At this time a large recent immigration to
Virginia and Maryland had raised the supply of tobacco beyond
ordinary demands, and this tended to increase the distress of the
planters. To discharge his obligations to his courtiers, Charles
granted the quitrents and escheats of all Virginia to Lord Arlington
and Lord Culpeper for thirty-one years. These hard measures
were received with dismay by people to whom Stuart loyalty had been
little less than a religion. They became discontented, and violated
the navigation acts as freely as the traders of New England.
The influence of the merchants was enough to secure the continu-
ation of the navigation policy of Cromwell. The ordinance of 1651
was reenacted, for the legality of recent parliamentary action was
80
FIRST YEARS OF THE RESTORATION 81
not granted, and to it was added the important amendment that
tobacco, sugar, and other enumerated colonial products destined
for a foreign port must first be landed in England, The Nay.
Ireland, or some colony other than that in which gation Acts
they were produced. The significance of this amendment of 1660,
was that no enumerated product could be carried to for- l663.
eign countries in foreign ships, which meant that foreign 72"
ships would not bring their own products to the colonies because they
could not get return cargoes. It also meant that colony ships could
take enumerated products to British ports alone. The fact that goods
from the continent could go to the colonies in British vessels and
that colony ships could take goods from the continent to the colonies,
led to violation of the law : ships could hardly be expected to make
the return voyage in ballast when opportunity of evasion was so easy.
To meet the difficulty a new law in 1663 provided that European
goods with a few exceptions should only go to the colonies from
England in English and colonial ships. The act of 1660 meant that
enumerated products should be sold in England, and that of 1663 meant
that all colony importations should come from England. The evasions
of these laws in the colonies led to a third act, passed in 1673. It
required every ship captain loading tobacco, sugar, or other enumerated
colonial products either to give bond for landing them in England
or to pay stipulated duties on the spot. In this way it was intended
to make colonial trade yield profit to the British importers, exporters,
and ship owners, as well as to the king's revenues. It was a theory
of the time that a colony planted by the mother country and protected
by it should in return yield advantages of trade. This policy, in
connection with the new system of import duties, was expected to
add largely to the king's revenues. It should be remembered, how-
ever, that tobacco was the only enumerated article produced in the
mainland colonies. The navigation acts did not apply to fish, timber,
fur, wheat, pork, beef, and many other exported articles.
When Charles came to the throne his colonies in America were
Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, Plymouth, New Haven, Con-
necticut, and Rhode Island, and to these New York, as
we have seen, was soon to be added. But there were
still vast regions on the coast in which Englishmen had
not settled. Out of these unsettled parts Charles created three
new colonies, Carolina, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, all proprietary
colonies granted to some of the leading noblemen of the court. It
was not so much to promote colonization as to advance the interests
of the grantees that these colonies were chartered.
The model of the proprietary colony was the county Palatine of
Durham, in England, over which the Bishop of Durham ruled under
the king. Whatever the king might do in England, ran the motto
of the law, the bishop might do in Durham. But in the proprietary
82 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
charters the right of the proprietor was limited by the provision that
he must make laws "by and with the consent of the freemen."
By this provision these colonies, as well as the others,
were able to secure the right to make laws in their own
Cofonyf assemblies subject to the veto of the proprietors. Be-
sides the colonies mentioned, New York, after its con-
quest from the Dutch, and Maryland, from the beginning, were
proprietary. This kind of colony was thought to have the ad-
vantage of powerful aid from its owners in its early stages; but
experience showed that the proprietors were more concerned to make
money out of their colonies than to spend it on them. They were,
also, not successful in keeping order, having no other military force
than they could summon from among the inhabitants themselves.
In Carolina this was especially true, and the end of proprietary rule
there was a blessing.
In 1629 the king granted Carolana, as he named it, to Sir Robert
Heath, but the grant lapsed for want of efforts to people the region
granted. In 1663 Charles II regranted it to eight nobles,
Una Grant Ashley, Albemarle, Clarendon, John Berkeley, William
Berkeley, Carteret, Craven, and Colleton. The bounds
were latitude 36° on the north and 31° on the south, and it extended
to the Pacific. It was seen on examination that the southern limits
of Virginia was latitude 36° 30', and a new charter issued in 1665 with
that line for the northern boundary of Carolina, as it was now called.
Thus the region between Virginia and Florida was opened to settle-
ment.
The proprietors had dreams of building a feudal state. Under
the guidance of Ashley, now the Earl of Shaftesbury, the funda-
mental constitutions were prepared by John Locke,
m^nteTcon"- t]?en in the early s^age of his brilliant career. They pro-
stitutions, vided for a feudal hierarchy, at the bottom of which should
be the freemen and at the top three ranks of high landed
lords with overwhelming power in political affairs. The system
was highly theoretical, and the proprietors did not expect it to be
in force at once. It was sent out to their agents with instructions
to put into force as much of it as possible. The agents published
it and the Carolina assemblies possibly gave it formal recognition,
but the system was never in actual use, and very few of the land-
gravers and caciques, the higher ranks of nobility provided for, were
appointed in Carolina.
Meanwhile, the ordinary forces of frontier life were
marif11*6" carrvmg population to Carolina. As early as 1654 men
Settlement, from Virginia had taken land on the northern shore
of Albemarle Sound, first securing grants from the In-
dians. In 1665 the proprietors sent them a government and author-
ized~an assembly for the " County of Albemarle." From that time a
THE CAROLINA SETTLEMENTS 8j
steady but slow stream of population arrived from Virginia, mostly
poor persons who found the frontier more congenial than the aristo-
cratic life on the James. The harbors were bad, and communication
with Europe was chiefly through Virginia. The people were mostly
dissenters or members of no church. They were intolerant of the
attempts of the proprietors to rule them, and there was much commo-
tion throughout the sixty-six years of proprietary rule. It was as
democratic a society as was planted on the coast. About 1690 the
Albemarle settlements, now expanded to the southward of the Sound,
began to be called North Carolina, and at a later period
Cape Romaine was fixed as the dividing point between Carolina
the two Carolinas. Thus the Cape Fear river, its only
good means of access to the sea, went to the northern province.
It had been the scene of a futile attempt at colonization as early as
1664, and from that time remained unsettled until 1725. It had
water communication with the interior of the colony, and had the
first settlements been placed here, and not in the isolated north-
eastern corner, it seems certain that the early history of North Caro-
lina would have been different.
In 1670 Charleston was settled by an expedition under William
Sayle. It grew steadily from the beginning, although it received
little aid from the proprietors beyond the first cost of
transportation to America. In 1680 French Huguenots Carolina
began to arrive, settling chiefly on the San tee river. The settled,
fertile soil and mild climate of the two Carolinas proved
very advantageous to the settlers, who, following the custom in
other colonies, placed themselves along the navigable streams, where
the bottom lands were richest. The people enjoyed abundance,
and in South Carolina men of business ability among the colonists
made fortunes easily. Their emergence out of the mass of "adven-
turers" was facilitated by the easy access to markets and the early
introduction of slaves as a cheap and permanent labor supply.
About 1693 rice began to be raised with profit. It was a staple
product, commanding a ready market in all parts of Europe, and it
played the part in South Carolina that tobacco played in Virginia
and Maryland. The Albemarle settlers did not raise either rice or
tobacco in considerable quantities.
The English conquest of New Netherland did not bring with it
as much liberal government as the English living under the Dutch
regime had expected. The Duke of York by his patent
from the king was constituted lord proprietor with power
almost absolute. He, however, dared not lay taxes
and give orders arbitrarily, lest his subjects be forced into
rebellion. His representative in the colony was Colonel Richard
Nicolls, the governor, an astute man whose tact did much to
make the rule of the proprietor bearable. He had promised the
84 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
people of Long Island self-government, and to redeem his promise
in form published the "Duke's Laws," as they were called. They
allowed the popular election of local constables and overseers, but made
them accountable to the governor, and they provided for trial by
jury. More important still, the judges were to be appointed by the
governor, and to them, sitting in one body, or assize, was intrusted
the law-making function, subject to the approval of the governor.
This system, which fell far short of representative government, was
soon extended to the entire colony. It did not satisfy the people,
but it was better than the Dutch rule, and the tact of Governor Nicolls
did much to lull the popular discontent. He returned to England in
1668.
In 1672 England began a war with Holland, and the next year
the Dutch appeared before New York with 23 ships and 1200 men.
The governor was absent in New England, and his repre-
New York sentative, without an adequate force to defend the place,
conquered surrendered after a feeble resistance in which one English-
D^tchbut man was killed. The old Dutch system of government
restored to was reestablished, and the name of the town of New York
England. was changed to New Orange. But when peace was made
in 1674 New York was restored to England, and the
king issued a new charter granting it to the Duke of York, who in
turn reissued "the Duke's Laws." At this time Edmund Andros
became governor, and ruled until he was succeeded in 1681 by Thomas
Dongan. Both men were loyal servants of the proprietor and
administered the government successfully. But the people continued
to ask for an elective assembly. To their request the duke turned
a deaf ear, saying that assemblies were dangerous things and often
disturbing to good government. Under his direction the seat of
power was the governor and council, who made the appointments
and constituted a narrow and powerful aristocracy.
The advocates of liberal government gained steadily in power,
and in 1681 their opportunity came. While Governor Andros was in
England to answer charges against his official conduct, the merchants,
seizing on a technicality, refused to pay the duties he
had imposed as the representative of the Duke. A strong
Assembly, petition was sent to England praying that New York
might be governed as other colonies by a governor, council,
and assembly, and urging that no duties ought to be taken without the
consent of the representatives of the people. The proprietor was
sensibly touched by the failure of revenue, and 1682 granted the peti-
tion but with notable restrictions. The assembly was to meet and
be dissolved at the order of the governor, the revenue raised should be
at the disposal of the proprietor, and all laws must be approved by
governor and proprietor. Under this system, the first assembly of
New York met in 1683. Fifteen of its acts are preserved. One of
NEW JERSEY SETTLED 85
them, known as the "Charter of Liberties," established the authority
of the assembly, guaranteed triennial sessions, and provided for
freedom of conscience and the popular assent to taxes. The whole
fifteen seem to have been approved at first by the Duke of York, but
before they were registered he became James II, and New York
became a royal province. The laws now went before the Committee
of Trade, which found that the " Charter of Liberties" asserted too
definitely the right of the assembly to govern the colony. In fact,
at that time there was in England a tendency to reduce the powers
of colonial assemblies ; and since James II as king did not need his
colonial revenue, the "charter" was disallowed. When Governor
Dongan in 1686 received a new commission, being now a royal governor,
he was authorized to make the laws for the colony. Thus ended
for the Stuart period the progress of liberal government in New York.
In 1664, the year New Yorjc was granted to the Duke, that part of
it which now comprises New Jersey was by the grantee transferred
to Lord John Berkeley and Sir George Carteret and called
New Jersey, from the Island of Jersey, which Carteret
had bravely defended during the Puritan wars. The
governor of New York protested in the name of his superior
that the grant only passed title to the land, but Berkeley and Carteret
insisted that it conferred on them the rights of government as well,
and they proceeded to organize the government of New Jersey, with
a governor, council, assembly, and local officers. The dispute was
finally settled in their favor. Some settlers were already within the
colony, Dutch and English, and more came. Among them were
many New England men who brought in the democratic spirit of
their former homes. At length the two proprietors divided their
holding. Then Berkeley sold his share, the western
part, to four prominent Quakers, among them William ^*tand
Penn. In 1682 East Jersey was purchased by Quakers jersey>
from the Carteret heirs, and soon after a small remnant
was acquired from Fenwick, who held by a previous grant from
Berkeley. Thus the two Jerseys became Quaker colonies. In the
eastern part the settlers were chiefly New Englanders, in the western
part they were Quakers. Both sections enjoyed religious liberty and
prospered under a liberal form of government.
But William Penn was not satisfied with a colony depending so
largely on charters badly defined, and in 1681 he secured from King
Charles a patent for Pennsylvania, west of the Delaware,
and made plans to build a commonwealth on Quaker
principles. The name was given by the king himself,
much to the chagrin of Penn, who wished to avoid a semblance of
vanity. The grant was evidently to satisfy the king's debt to
Penn's father, who had been a British admiral. It gave Penn, the
sole proprietor, ample power to devise a government. But recent
86 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
experiences had taught the king that a colony was capable of becom-
ing quite an independent affair, and it was provided that the Penn-
sylvania laws be submitted to the king, that the navigation acts be
enforced, and that the supremacy of Parliament be recognized.
Penn's terms to attract colonists were liberal. To those English-
men, Swedes, and Dutchmen who were already in the region ceded he
offered assurances of protection, and in 1681 he sent them a governor,
[n England he himself was ceaselessly active in measures to attract
immigrants. His position among the Quakers was such
th.at his invitation must be heard. It was sent forth
with persuasive charms. Let all thrifty men, he said,
who wished to establish prosperous homes in a new land and all who
would live in just equality with their neighbors come to Pennsylvania.
No religious discrimination should be made against any man who
acknowledged the existence of God, but only Christians could take
part in government. His ideas of good government were embodied
in a published "Frame of Government." "Any government," he
said, "is free to the people under it, whatever be the frame, where
the laws rule and the people are a party to those laws, and more than
this is tyranny, oligarchy, or confusion." To an age keenly alive to
the dangers of the doctrine of divine right of kings this must have
been a voice of comfort.
In 1682 Penn himself arrived in Pennsylvania, accompanied by
about one hundred colonists. In 1682 he had acquired what is now
Delaware from the Duke of York, in order that his colony
Penn might have sea front ; and he first visited the settlements
already planted about New Castle. Having confirmed
the government of the three "Lower Counties," i.e. Delaware,
he went on to Philadelphia, the site of which had already been
selected under his directions at the confluence of the Schuylkill and
Delaware rivers. Its broad streets, at right angles with one another,
gave the place an air of dignity which long impressed visitors. It was
Penn's desire that each dwelling should be in the center of a garden
in order that- Philadelphia might be "a green country town, which
will never be burned and always be wholesome." He gave careful
supervision to all that pertained to the colony, and said in seven
years, "with the help of God," Pennsylvania would equal her neigh-
bors in population. The boast was not too large, for immigrants
came in large numbers, and in three years the population exceeded
eight thousand.
Penn's benevolence was seen in his policy toward the natives. He
took no land without making treaties in which he gave articles of
value to the savages. One treaty, in June, 1683, probably
thTlndians a^ Shackamaxon, now Kensington, became famous, and
tradition long referred to the "Treaty Elm" under which
it was made. The result of this policy was uninterrupted peace
EARLY PENNSYLVANIA GOVERNMENT 87
with the Indians of eastern Pennsylvania. It was supported
by the sobriety of the inhabitants and by the absence of frontier
land squatters who occasioned most of the Indian wars in other
colonies.
Penn's "Frame of Government" provided for a council of 72 mem-
bers and an assembly of 200, all elected by the freeholders. Like the
Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina, it was drawn
for a large colony and without reference to actual con- Seif-Gov-
ditions in a new country. Penn did not attempt to put p^J^y/."1
it into operation. His first assembly, which met in De- Vania.
cember, 1682, consisted of a council of eighteen members
and a lower house of 54, all elected by the settlers. To this body he
gave the privilege of preparing the government of the colony, with
the result that a " Great Charter" was enacted by the assembly,
April 8, 1683, in which all the functions of government were provided
for by the representatives of the people. Penn accepted it, for he
wished for nothing more than that men should govern themselves in
their own way, but in a spirit of enlightened benevolence. However,
his personal influence had much to do with the form of government
adopted. Another measure of this first assembly was to incorporate
the Lower Counties with Pennsylvania. It was action very objec-
tionable to the people of the Counties themselves, and Delaware
they soon began an agitation which resulted, early in the
next century, in their separation as a distinct colony though still under
the governor appointed by Penn for Pennsylvania.
Meanwhile, Penn was called to England, partly to relieve his dis-
tressed brethren through his personal influence with the Duke of
York and partly to arrange a boundary dispute with Lord
Baltimore. In the first instance he was easily successful ;
for 1 200 Quakers were released from prison through his England,
intercessions. In the second he was also successful, but
it was many years before the victory was secured. The controversy
with Lord Baltimore goes back to the grant of 1681, which undoubtedly
included within Pennsylvania lands Charles I had granted to Mary-
land. The fortieth parallel of latitude marked Maryland's northern
boundary by the charter of 1632 ; but Penn's charter pro-
vided that his southern line should begin with a semi- The Penn-
circle with a radius of twelve miles from New Castle and BJ^ary
proceed westward on the fortieth parallel from the point Controversy,
at which the semicircle cut that parallel. On investiga-
tion it was found that New Castle was 20 miles south of the fortieth
parallel, and if the semicircle were drawn as described, it would leave
a broad strip of Maryland in the new colony. Penn argued his rights
against Baltimore, but could not settle the dispute. The latter naturally
held to his rights under a grant previous to 1681 ; but Penn, who was
bent on having an outlet to the sea, would not relent, and the dispute
88 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
was continued by the two men and their heirs until 1760. In thac
year the present boundary was agreed upon, and in 1767 it was run by
Mason and Dixon.
Even more annoying was the controversy for the possession of
Delaware. All the colony was within the bounds of the Maryland
patent, but the Duke of York claimed it by the conquest
cfwTMe of the Dutch> and Baltimore did not dispute the claim.
to Delaware. When, however, the Duke transferred Delaware to Penn
the Maryland proprietor asserted his rights and seemed
about to prevent the confirmation of the Duke's grant when Penn re-
turned to England, 1684. The influence of the Quaker proved suffi-
cient for his cause, and in 1685 his right to Delaware was recognized
by the Lords of Trade. His wonderful influence with James, now
become king, was the despair of his enemies, who started the report,
widely believed at the time, that Penn was in reality a Jesuit. He
came under suspicion when James was driven out, was arrested, and
for a time, 1692-1694, his colony was taken from him. He easily
cleared himself of the charges and was restored to his rights. In
England many misfortunes beset him. Chief among them was the
news that the colonists were wrangling over the powers of
His Second government. After many gentle remonstrances he himself
Pennsyl- came back in 1699, and for five years modified by his pres-
vania. ence the strife which is, perhaps, inherent in a democracy
such as he had created. Spite of the divisions the colony
grew rapidly in numbers and wealth.
THE STUART REACTION
The Cromwellian period in Maryland history, so full of political
and military combat, was succeeded by an interval of quiet. Each
side had learned something in the conflict. The proprietor,
at^eace w^° eas^y secured the recognition of his rights from
Charles II, knew well that turmoil interfered with industry
and consequently lessened his income. The people longed for peace.
The toleration act of 1649, made to meet an exigency of the time, re-
mained a permanent result of the late conflict, and for a time Catho-
lics and Protestants lived together amicably.
Cecil Calvert, the second Lord Baltimore, died in 1675. Under
him the colony was founded, and his tactfulness had brought it through
many dangers. His son and successor, Charles, governor
Ouules* ^rom I^^I~I^7S> was a man °f downright convictions, and
Calvert. knew not his father's art of compromising. Like other
English noblemen of the day he wished to use political
power for the benefit ot his family and dependents. What Charles II
did in England, what the Duke of York did in New York, and what
Berkeley did in Virginia, Charles Calvert, as governor and as pro-
STUART IDEALS RESISTED 89
prietor, sought to do in Maryland. Through him the offices were
filled with kinsmen, the suffrage was limited to freeholders, and only
half of the members-elect were summoned to the assembly. This
policy awakened the old spirit of resistance, and in 1676, while Lord
Baltimore was absent, a band of sixty, incited by Bacon's example in
Virginia, gathered to overthrow the proprietary government. . The
governor seized and hanged the popular leaders, Davis and Pate, and
the rebellion collapsed.
But the spirit of discontent did not disappear. The absence of
Baltimore in order to oppose Penn's efforts in England gave oppor-
tunity to its growth. Eventually he fell into a dispute
with the collectors of the royal revenues in Maryland and
the king took the side of his own officers. Most important
of all, the struggle was given a religious cast. The accession of James
II, a Catholic sovereign, in 1685 accentuated this phase of the con-
troversy. When the royal prince, called the "Old Pretender" by
most Protestants, was born, he was proclaimed in Maryland by the
proprietary governor with impolitic fervor. The Protestants, through
the progress of immigration many times as numerous as the Catholics,
were ready for revolt. Then came news that William of Orange had
landed in England. No longer restrained, they formed under the
lead of John Corde and others an Association for the Defense of the
Protestant Religion. They seized St. Mary's, the seat of government,
dispersed the Catholic bands who met to resist them, sent a loyal
address to William and Mary, and held an assembly in which repre-
sentation was on a popular basis. The new sovereign of England
accepted the revolution in Maryland, which then became a royal
province. In 1715 a Protestant succeeded to the Baltimore title and
was restored to his full rights in Maryland, which from that time until
the revolution was a proprietary colony.
For sixteen years after the Restoration political authority in Vir-
ginia was the will of Governor William Berkeley. As Charles II pro-
longed his own supremacy by maintaining the "Cavalier
Parliament" for seventeen years, so Berkeley in Virginia Despotism
kept alive for fourteen years the assembly chosen in 1661
in the height of enthusiasm for the Stuarts. By this means, by
nominating his own councillors, and by making other appointments
judiciously, he concentrated the authority in the hands of a small
group of wealthy planters who depended on his own favor. Mean-
while, the price of tobacco had steadily fallen, due partly to the navi-
gation acts and partly to over-production. Virginia had no other
money crop, and naturally exploited that to the limit of her capacity.
Proposals to limit production had little effect, and there was much
suffering. Throughout this period prices of imported merchandise
grew higher, the planters fell into debt to the London merchants,
and the spirit of hopelessness easily ran into defiance. Berkeley's
90 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
system of despotism was the most visible of political evils, and they
turned against it as the cause of all their distress.
The occasion of the outbreak was an Indian war. Within recent
years the march of settlement had reached the Potomac valley, which
alarmed the Indians in that region. They foresaw the
Rebefflon en<^ °^ ^eir hunting grounds, and their murmuring created
apprehension in the minds of the settlers. In 1675 the
savages killed two planters on the Potomac, and the whites replied
by killing the murderers and several other Indians. Reprisals were
made by the red men, and soon the frontier was harrowed from end to
end. Then the Susquehannocks rose in January, 1676, and killed
thirty-six whites. The settlers fled from the border, and called on the
governor for protection. He ordered a body of militia to the scene of
danger, but recalled it before it had well started. His opponents
claimed that he derived profits from the Indian trade, and on that
account wished to avoid a war.
The assembly met in March, 1676, and proposed to build forts in
the Indian country. The people objected that this only meant higher
taxes. What they wished was a vigorous campaign to
Bacon as- break the power of the Indians effectively. To their
Leadership, petitions of this purport Berkeley returned an angry re-
proof and the people began to raise troops on their own
account. They found an excellent leader in Nathaniel Bacon. His
fervid speeches had ample foundation in the condition of the colony,
and he was shortly at the head of three hundred men, with his face
set toward the frontier. To Berkeley this was treason, and he promptly
said so in a proclamation. Two hundred and forty of Bacon's men
then went home, but he marched on with the rest, and in a bloody
action killed one hundred and fifty Indians.
Meanwhile, the movement took on the form of open resistance to
the existing regime. People were gathering with arms in their hands,
and demanding a new assembly chosen by the freemen.
becomes11* In Panic Berkeley promised all that was asked; and even
Political. pardoned Bacon and restored him to the Council. In the
new assembly a number of reforms were adopted which
must have been as gall to the power-loving governor. The reformers
did not trust the governor, and wished their leader to be commander-
in-chief of the militia, probably as a guarantee that the governor
would not repudiate his promises. They claimed that the com-
mand had been promised, and when it was not given a violent
quarrel arose. Bacon was impetuous, and ended by collecting five
hundred armed men, with whom he overawed Berkeley and forced
him to issue a commission to operate against the Indians. Then
the army marched away to the scene of war. As soon as they
were gone, the governor repudiated what he had done and called
on the people to aid him in suppressing the "rebels." There was
BACON'S REBELLION 91
no response to his call, and he fled to Accomac County beyond
Chesapeake Bay.
The struggle thus became a real attempt at revolution. Bacon
had begun as a reformer. If he now yielded, all his work was for
naught. Being an aggressive man, he determined to accept
the challenge and fight it out with the governor. His Rebellion
influence over his followers was great enough to carry Fj^d" ed
many of them with him, but many others fell away and
chose to follow Berkeley, who was able to return to Jamestown with
six hundred men. Bacon was soon upon him, besieged the town, and
forced the governor to take flight. The struggle was now a social one,
the mass of poor and moderately well-to-do people supported the
revolt, and the great planters generally were for the old order. While
he constructed his lines before the capital, Bacon forced the wives
and daughters of many of his enemies to stand before his works to
avert the fire of the governor's soldiers. When Jamestown fell he
burned it lest it should again offer asylum to his enemies. All this
happened during the summer and early autumn of 1676. What else
would have come is only to be guessed ; for Bacon died October 26
of a fever contracted through exposure, and his cause collapsed.
Berkeley came back to Jamestown, harried out the rem-
nant of the rebels who had taken refuge in the swamps,
and although the king had promised amnesty to those who
submitted, hanged thirteen as a warning to those who defied his author-
ity. To the captured William Drummond, who, before he joined
Bacon, had been governor of Albemarle, probably through Berkeley's
selection, the governor said in greeting him: "Mr. Drummond, you
are welcome. I am more glad to see you than any man in Virginia.
Mr. Drummond, you shall be hanged in half an hour." To which the
prisoner replied: "As your honor pleases," and he was led away to the
scaffold.
News of these commotions had ere this reached England, and the
king had already dispatched a force of one thousand men under three
commissioners to pacify Virginia. Berkeley's high pro-
ceedings were well known in England, and the knowledge
was reflected in the instructions of the commissioners.
Amnesty was offered to all rebels who would submit, and
Jeffreys, one of the three, was to succeed Berkeley as governor. They
found Berkeley supreme and defiant. His powerful family influence in
England made it unwise to arrest him, and there was a period of angry
wrangling, at the end of which the irritable old man embarked of his
own motion. Arrived at London, he learned that the king would not
see him. It was the last straw for a body and mind already tottering
under the weight of years, and he died in a few months, July, 1677.
He had in his day been a stout-hearted defender of the royal author-
ity, a friend of the Established Church, and a worthy leader of the
92 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
well-born Virginia gentry. His ideals were of great account in a day
when democracy was in its cruder stages of development. His often
quoted words on education in Virginia express the ideals
Ideals S of his class- "J thank God>" he said> "there are no free
schools nor printing, and I hope we shall not have any
these hundred years, for learning has brought disobedience and heresy
and sects into the world and printing has divulged [them] and libels
against the best government. God keep us from both."
Bacon's Rebellion shows that Virginia society had gone beyond this
ideal, and the royal commissioners recognized the fact. They called for
free expressions of grievances with the result that a "char-
Rapadty $ ter " °^ privileges was granted by the king in which im-
portant reforms in local government were included. In
1679 Lord Culpeper arrived as governor. He was in need of money,
and proceeded to get it by increasing the fees, requiring "presents" in
money from outgoing ship captains, and other similar measures. It
was at this time that lawless bands of tobacco planters began to de-
stroy the growing crops to relieve the over-production which produced
low prices. In 1684 Culpeper was succeeded as governor by Lord
Howard of Emngham, who was in no sense a better ruler than Cul-
peper. Thus passed the years until the end of the Stuart dynasty,
years full of commotion, in which the Virginia spirit of self-govern-
ment slowly rose against the power of a governor appointed by the
king but bent on nothing so much as his own advantage. It took
many years of such experience to change the most royal of the colonies
into an out-and-out home of revolution ; but the process went steadily
on.
THE COLONIES UNDER THE LATER STUARTS, 1660-1689
Charles II did not like the Puritan colonies, but he did not wish the
trouble of abolishing them. It was easier to give charters to Connecti-
cut and Rhode Island, to wink at.the compromise by which
England Massachusetts seemed to give the suffrage to members of
the English Church, and to take what revenue came from
the New England trade, than to risk war with the colonists as a result
of suppressing the charter. Thus the years passed, for a time in safety
for the New Englanders, while their fellow dissenters in England
suffered from a high church reaction. When trouble at last came it
was through the initiation of his over-zealous officers rather than
through the will of the good-natured king.
A more serious peril was the attitude of the Indians. The
steady extension of the settlements from the seashore inward
showed them that their hunting grounds were in danger,
Philip's War and ^ey came together in common defense under Philip,
son of Massasoit, the Wampanoag, long the friend and
stay of Plymouth colony. The war began in the summer of 1675
MASSACHUSETTS AND THE STUARTS 93
with the usual outrages on the frontier, in which retaliation and pitiless
slaughter played their parts. Knowing the habits of the whites, the
Indians fell on them suddenly with bloody results. The Nipmucks,
in western Connecticut and Massachusetts, joined in the struggle, and
the river towns were ravaged. Then the Narragansetts appeared
about to join the belligerents ; and the whites, without waiting for
open hostilities, fell on them in a fort in what is now Kingston, Rhode
Island, and crushed effectually their military power. But the struggle
went on more bitterly than ever, the whites fighting for life persistently
and steadily. After some months their superior organization began to
tell. Canonchet, king of the Narragansetts, was run down and slain
in April, 1676. A month later one hundred and twenty warriors were
killed in a battle on the Connecticut, and August 12, 1676, Philip
himself fell at the hands of Colonel Church, a noted Indian fighter.
Through nearly two years' fighting the colonists lost severely in life
and property. Their homes were ruined, their crops destroyed, and
famine was avoided only by importing grain from Virginia. But the
power of the Indians was broken, and thenceforth the settlers might
plant in safety in the interior. The most permanent effect of the
struggle was the damage inflicted on the beaver trade. Driving back
the Indians inevitably limited the area of its operation. In this
struggle all the New England colonies suffered indiscriminately, and
all united in the measures of defense.
The wounds of war were not healed before Massachusetts realized
that serious efforts were to be made to annul the liberal charter under
which she enjoyed self-government. The attack would
doubtless be of a legal nature, the charge being made that Massa-
the charter should be forfeited because the colony had, charter8
among other things, harbored some of the regicides, Threatened,
evaded the king's orders in regard to a broader suffrage,
denied the right of appeal to England, shown a spirit of indifference to
the royal authorities in regard to the appointment of agents in England,
and continually evaded the navigation acts. In 1676 Edward Ran-
dolph visited Boston as a "messenger" with a letter from the king to
the authorities. He was privately instructed to ascertain in what
respect the colony laws were against those of England and to report on
religious conditions, the execution of the navigation acts, and the
numbers and strength of the colonists. He was a shrewd observer,
and was prejudiced against the Puritans. IJis report was very un-
favorable to the colony, but for a time nothing was done.
In 1678, however, Randolph was appointed collector of the customs
for New England and took up his residence in Boston with the design
of breaking up smuggling, which was widespread. His numerous
complaints sent to England all proceeded from the conclusion that
the only way to enforce the acts of trade was for the king to take
the charter colonies into his own hands and appoint officers who
94 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
would support the collector. Charles II wanted little urging on this
point ; for just at this time he was proceeding against the municipal
charters of England. June 12, 1683, he secured from a
Massa- partial court a verdict against the charter of London, and
Charter8 next dav tne attorney-general was ordered to take out a
Annulled. writ of quo warranto against the Massachusetts Company.
Randolph, then in England, was sent back to Boston to serve
the writ, a task congenial to his feelings. The Massachusetts authori-
ties retained counsel and determined to contest the suit. Storms
intervened, and Randolph could not return the writ within the time
set, so that it failed. Rather than go through the process of sending
another writ to Boston the attorney-general now sued out in the court
of chancery a writ of scire facias, which had the virtue of not requiring
service in the colony. Under this writ the case came to a speedy
hearing, and October 23, 1684, the charter was declared forfeited.
Pleased with his victory, Randolph now marched against the other
colonial charters. Pennsylvania alone was saved through the in-
fluence of her proprietor ; but writs were issued against
Charters in the cnarters of Connecticut, Rhode Island, the two Jerseys,
Danger.81 and Delaware. Randolph's pockets fairly bulged with
quo warrantos. But the times were turbulent in England,
and murmuring was heard against the king's wholesale destruction of
charters. For this, and for other reasons, the writs were not pressed
to an issue, and thus the other charter colonies safely outran the
Stuart peril.
But they came near shipwreck on a scheme for a general consoli-
dation of the colonies north of Delaware Bay. This scheme was
devised much earlier than 1684, and only awaited the
The Do- forfeiture of charters to be put into operation. The result
New°Eng- m ^e Massachusetts case encouraged its promoters to
land. proceed. Without waiting for the results of the pro-
cesses against the charters of Connecticut and Rhode
Island, they were treated as already annulled, and a governor was ap-
pointed to rule over all New England. The man selected for the
position by Charles II was the stern Colonel Percy Kirke, who could
hardly have failed to create rebellion had he come to rule New England
without the aid of an assembly, as his instructions ran. When James
II came to the throne the appointment was not completed, and he
sent Kirke to deal with the rebels at Taunton and made Edmund
Andros governor of New England. Andros's authority extended over
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maine, and Plymouth. He was to rule
without an assembly and with the aid of an appointed council. Rhode
Island and Connecticut were frightened into releasing their independ-
ence, although the latter concealed its charter and brought it forth in
happier days. In 1688 a new commission constituted Andros governor
of all the colonies north of Pennsylvania, and to this consolidated
STUART IDEALS ESTABLISHED 95
territory was given the name of the Dominion of New England. Each
constituent colony was to become a district in the larger organization
and to lose its assembly, but from it were appointed members of the
governor's grand council which ruled the Dominion. Over New York
Francis Nicholson ruled as deputy governor, but Andros himself
supervised the rest of his "dominion." This system, so soon to be
overthrown, expressed James II's ideal of colonial government.
During the short time between the fall of the charter and the arrival
of Andros, Joseph Dudley was governor of Massachusetts. He was
born, in the colony, but was now zealous for the royal
prerogative. He wished to make the transition in govern- Dudley
ment as easy as possible, but the task was difficult from
its very nature. The people were not prepared to resist : setts.
they submitted with sullen reluctance. Now came a
clergyman of the English Church, for whom Dudley demanded the
use of one of the Boston meetinghouses. The demand was steadily
refused. After a while it was agreed that the clergyman, Mr. Rat-
cliffe, should use Mr. Willard's meetinghouse each Sunday, one
minister preaching after the other finished and alternately taking the
first sermon. But trouble arose because neither would stop at the
proper time, and at length Andros seized a lot belonging to the town,
and on it was erected King's Chapel. The new regime also gave
offense by celebrating Christmas, by requiring persons taking an oath
to kiss the Bible instead of holding up the hand, by ordering that
school teachers should have licenses from the governor, and by re-
quiring the shops to close on the anniversary of the death of Charles I.
All these offenses, however, were surpassed by the extreme zeal with
which the governor ordered and celebrated public thanksgivings for
the birth of a son to their Catholic majesties in 1688.
Within its short duration Andros's government showed itself a
despotism. He was given the right to make laws, levy taxes, and
administer justice. The Council was expected to offer
advice, but he so filled it with his instruments that it but j^J™8'8
reflected his will. When he ordered the collection of the Measures,
old taxes, no longer legal since the assembly did not exist,
some towns refused to pay on the ground that they were assessed
illegally. The leading men of Ipswich were arrested, tried before a
" special commission," and fined for their resistance. To this prac-
tical proof that their liberties were abridged was added the conviction
that their property was in danger. By law all the ungranted land in
the colonies belonged to the king, and Andros was to dispose of it in
his "Dominion," subject to quitrent. He declared that most of
the old land grants were .worthless, and seemed about to take pos-
session of farms and even village lots. But he at last showed his
favor by saying that he would issue regular grants to all whose titles
were in question. As he and his officers must have fees for these
96 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
grants, the offer was not a disinterested one. Moreover, many choice
bits of land were by influential^ officials declared to be subject to new
grants, which showed the people that the new regime was rapacious as
well as arbitrary.
But the day of James II was run. November 5, 1688, William of
Orange landed in England. December 22 James fled the kingdom,
and in February, 1689, Parliament offered the crown to
Parlia- William and Mary. It was a bloodless but complete
mentary revolution, not only in dynasty but also in the fun-
in°Englandn damental theory of government. For the Stuart ideal
and the of divine right was now substituted the supremacy
Colonies. of the people in Parliament. This system could
hardly exist in England without having its echo in
the colonies. Not only did they seize the opportunity to wipe out,
as in New England, all traces of James's recent innovations, but
from that time every colonial assembly felt more strongly than ever
its right to lay taxes and make laws within its own province. This
conviction, slowly developing, precipitated at the close of three-quarters
of a century a struggle between mother country and colonies, the real
import of which was, Should the colonial assemblies or Parliament
govern the colonies ?
The news of William's success in England created a profound im-
pression in Massachusetts, where the people were ripe for revolt. In
the "Declaration" he issued on landing he said that
Overthrown magistrates unjustly turned out of office should resume
their functions. He had in mind the municipalities of
England, but the New Englanders took it as referring to the colonies.
This " Declaration" was brought to Boston by John Winslow, whom
Andros at once arrested. But the news was out, and on April 18,
1689, the people rose in arms, seized and imprisoned Andros, Ran-
dolph, and other officials, and proclaimed the restitution of the old
government under Bradstreet, the last governor under the charter.
They sent a report of their action to their agent in England and asked
that they be allowed the old charter. Andros remained a prisoner
in Castle William nearly a year, and was then sent to England.
In New York, where Francis Nicholson ruled as Andros's deputy,
affairs were also ripe for revolt. James had placed many Catholics in
office in the colony, and this seemed to support the rumor,
Revolution widely circulated in Massachusetts as well, that he would
yorkew introduce the Catholic religion, in the colonies. Against
Nicholson all the Protestant population was ready to act.
Disappointment because the colony had not been given an effective
assembly also had much to do with the popular discontent. The
people found a leader in Jacob Leisler, German by birth, now a pros-
perous merchant in New York. Nicholson hesitated to proclaim
William and Mary, which aroused severe criticism by opponents of
ENGLISH REVOLUTION AND THE COLONIES 97
the Stuarts. In May, 1689, a careless remark was twisted by rumor
until it was reported that he threatened to burn the town with his own
hand. Violent demonstrations followed, and the deputy governor
fled to England, leaving the government to three councillors, Phillips,
Cortlandt, and Bayard. Leisler now came to the front. At the
head of the popular party, he disregarded the councillors, and called
a convention of delegates from the counties. This body met and
appointed Leisler commander-in-chief of the province, with large
powers of government. For two turbulent years he was in control of
the province.
In Maryland, as we have seen (page 91), the expulsion of the
Stuarts from England was followed by Corde's Rebellion, thus mak-
ing it the third colony in which force was used to bring
about the recognition of William and Mary. In the The Rev°-
other colonies the transition occurred peaceably. Rhode other"1
Island and Connecticut resumed their charters and were Colonies,
allowed the privilege on the ground that the charters had
never been repealed or surrendered. Massachusetts was allowed to
retain Maine, but New Hampshire, recognized as a royal colony in
1679 but made a part of the Dominion of New England in 1686, now
became a royal province once more. Commotions at once appeared,
and in 1699 the province was placed under the supervision of the gov-
ernor of Massachusetts. It was not until 1741 that it again had a
distinct governor, although a lieutenant governor generally ruled
during the interval. New Jersey was allowed to return to her pro-
prietors until 1702, when she also became a royal province. In
the rearrangement Plymouth became a part of Massachusetts. Thus
was distributed all the territory which had been placed under the
authority of Andros. Virginia and the Carolinas were not materially
affected by the revolution, and Pennsylvania, including Delaware,
while inwardly tranquil, was taken from the hands of the proprietor
in 1692 on the charge that he was a Jacobite, but restored in 1694,
when his innocence had been made apparent.
In Massachusetts the renewal of the old charter was desired by a
portion of the people, while others thought it a good opportunity to
get a self-governing system like that of Connecticut.
Each side had its representatives in England, but neither New
won. The charter of 1691 was largely due to the influence ^setts
of Edward Randolph, just arrived in London out of cap- charter,
tivity in Boston. By it Massachusetts became a royal
province with a governor appointed by the king, an assembly elected
by property-holders, and a council, not appointed by the king as else-
where, but nominated by the assembly and approved by the governor.
In ordinary matters the approval of laws was left to the governor,
though the king reserved the right of sanction to certain special
affairs. The Puritan party was dealt a severe but expected blow in
the provision for liberty of conscience for all Protestants.
98 COLONIAL PROGRESS UNDER LATER STUARTS
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Most of the general works referring to events narrated in this chapter are the
same as those given for the two preceding chapters; but specific mention must
be made of two others, Channing, History of the United States, vol. II (1908),
the most recent treatment by a scholar; and Andrews, Colonial Self -Government
(1904), very clear and authoritative. For New England, New York, Virginia,
and Maryland the sources previously mentioned are also available. For the
newer colonies, see the following secondary works and sources: New Jersey:
Smith, The Colony of New Jersey (1765 and 1877), valuable for documents; White-
head, East Jersey under Proprietary Governments (N. J. Hist. Soc. Collections,
I, ed. 1875) ; and Documents Relating to the Colonial History of New Jersey, 27 vols.
(1880-1912), one of the three great collections of published colonial records.
Pennsylvania: Bowden, History of Friends in America, 2 vols. (1851-1854);
Proud, History of Pennsylvania [1681-1742], 2 vols. (1797-1798), still the best
general history of the colony ; Fisher, The Making of Pennsylvania (1896), popular ;
Shepherd, History of Proprietary Government in Pennsylvania (Columbia University
Studies, 1896); Sharpless, History of Quaker Government in Pennsylvania, 2 vols.
(1898-1899). Valuable documents are in Colonial Records, 16 vols. (1838-1852) ;
Votes of Assembly, 1662-1776, 6 vols. (1752-1776); Hist. Soc. of Penn. Memoirs
(1826-), and Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography (1877-).
Delaware : The early history is closely connected with that of New York and
Pennsylvania, q.v. The best general history is Scharf, History of Delaware,
2 vols. (1888). On the early period see also Ferris, History of the Original Settle-
ments on the Delaware (1846).
North Carolina: Ashe, History of North Carolina, vol. I (1908-), the best
treatment, but without appreciation of social and industrial development ; Hawks,
History of North Carolina, 2 vols. (1857-1858) ; Bassett, Constitutional Beginnings
of North Carolina (Johns Hopkins Studies, 1894), deals with political institutions
until 1729; Weeks, Church and State in North Carolina (Ibid., 1893), Colonial Records,
of North Carolina (10 vols., 1886-1890), one of the three great collections of pub-
lished Colonial records.
South Carolina : McCrady, South Carolina under the Proprietary Government
(1897), strictly chronological; Rivers, Sketch of the History of South Carolina to
1719 (1856); and The Shaftesbury Papers (S. C. Hist. Soc. Collections, 1897), an
important early source. Many papers relating to this colony are in the North
Carolina Colonial Records. A work still valuable is Carroll, Historical Collections
of South Carolina, 2 vols. (1836).
Important works especially useful for this period but relating to the older1 colonies
are as follows : Tappan, Edward Randolph, 5 vols. (Prince Society Publications),
(1898-1899) ; Whitmore, Andros Tracts, 3 vols. (Ibid., 1868) ; Hutchinson Papers,
2 vols. (1865); Narragansett Club Publications, ist series (1866), contains Roger
Williams's letters, a very valuable source of information; Beverley, History of
Virginia (1722) ; Jones, Present State of Virginia (1724) ; Burk, History of Virginia,
4 vols. (1804-1816); Henning, Statutes at Large, 1619-1792, 13 vols. (1823);
The Beginning, Progress, and Conclusion of Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia by T. M.,
which with other matter relating to Bacon, is in Force, Tracts and in American
Colonial Tracts. See also Virginia Magazine of History and Biography; Sharp,
Causes of the Revolution of 1689 in Maryland (Johns Hopkins Studies, 189-) ; Steiner,
Protestant Revolution in Maryland (Am. Hist. Assn. Report, 1897) ; and Mereness,
Maryland as a Proprietary Province (1901).
For Independent Reading
Fisher, The Making of Pennsylvania (1896) ; Mrs. Earle, Home Life in Colonial
Days (1898); Ibid., Colonial Days in Old New York (1896); Fisher, The True
William Penn (1899) ; Fiske, Beginnings of New England (1889) ; Kuhns, German
and Swiss Settlements of Pennsylvania (1901).
CHAPTER VI
COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT, 1690-1763
DEVELOPMENT OF THE COLONIAL CONFLICT
OUR colonial history proceeds in two currents, one English and one
American. The beginning of each is somewhat confused because each
began without plan and according to special conditions. But by
1690 each current has become more distinct. We can now see what
England is doing for the colonies and how the latter, though widely
differing in surroundings, begin to have common experiences and
interests.
The English colonial policy under the later Stuarts looked to ab-
solute government, through a governor and council and without the
aid of an assembly. The revolution of 1689 checked
this plan and the colonial system henceforth contained Principles
the following general features: i. A desire to make the
royal provinces uniform in the colonies; 2. An absence Policy,
of parliamentary control, the colonies being under supreme
authority of the king, who established the charters, appointed the high
officers, and passed on colonial laws ; 3. The navigation acts, designed
to benefit English merchants and ship owners, who made up a strong
part of the support of government. These acts were enforced by
collectors and admiralty courts created by the king and distinct from
the ordinary colonial officials, with whom they were sometimes in
violent quarrel. 4. The maintenance of effective imperial control
through the royal officials. The governor of a province was expected
to guard the interests of the crown, resist encroachments of authority
by the colonial assembly, and by influence over the colonial gentry to
create, if possible, a party of king's friends among the inhabitants.
Some of the governors performed the last of these tasks successfully,
notably William Tryon, but others, like Andros, Nicholson, and
Bellomont, were tactless and irascible and were continually at vari-
ance with the colonists. 5. The growing interference of Parliament
in colonial affairs. This began with the passage of the acts of trade,
many times amended or defined, but it extended to the regulation of
money, the protection of British creditors against loss in the colonies,
the establishment of post offices, and other matters related to trade.
From this position it was not far for Parliament to advance when it
later decided to tax the colonists directly.
Q9
ioo COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
This system grew up under men of experience who believed it gave
the best results to all concerned. To the colonies England gave pro-
tection against other powers, and even against the In-
ideal.ni dians in extreme cases. From her they received their
lands, their laws, and their very existence. Was it too
much to expect they should contribute something in return to support
the trade and maintain the glory of England ? And if this be granted,
was it not reasonable that such a system of administration be preserved
that the colonies should not forget filial duty or question parental
authority ? To all of which the colonies had the plain answer that
they acted in their own interests, as was the right of Englishmen.
In 1690 the population of the colonies was about 220,000, most of
them agriculturists. Wherever they lived they had the same interests
in relation to England. Every colony had a legislature,
Colonies' "^ew ^or^ having won that long demanded favor with
Sidet the triumph of William and Mary. This body became
instinctively the guardian of the interests of the colony,
and it was in continual opposition to the royal officials. As it be-
came more inclined to assert colonial rights of self-government, the
crown became more willing to resist. To each side the action of the
other seemed aggressive, and it was resisted by all the arts known to
able politicians. In this long struggle, from which no colony was
exempt, the causes of dispute vary. Sometimes it is the payment of
salaries to the governor, at other times quitrents, or land sales, or the
issue of paper money ; but the struggle is always fundamentally the
same, and it leads to the same end. This struggle was also an im-
portant training school for colonial leaders. It not only formed par-
ties, ready at the proper time for the work of revolution, but it de-
veloped the men who led them.
During the period now under consideration three wars between
England and France had their reactions in America. They brought
the Canadian Indians down on the English frontiers,
the French* forced the colonists to ngnt m defense of their homes, and
and Indian even ^ them to make expeditions for the conquest of
Wars. parts of Canada. All this gave the people confidence in
their ability to defend their country, trained men and
officers to military duty, and developed the spirit of union in a com-
mon cause. Hardly a colonial assembly but shows a firmer grip on the
political life of its colony through having raised its contingents for
the wars ; for here, as in England, before money was voted grievances
must be redressed. A governor who wished to get his colonial as-
sembly to raise troops for the Canadian frontier could not afford to
quarrel with that assembly.
But it must not be supposed that the party strife in the colonies
measured the state of their happiness. It was an era of great indus-
trial development. In 1689 the frontier line from Maine to the
COLONIAL CONTROVERSIES 101
Savannah river followed the coast generally at not more than fifty
miles distance. In 1760 settlers had penetrated into all parts of New
England, and all of the South from Florida to New York
westward as far as the Alleghanies — which barrier, in- settlement^
deed, had been crossed by the most daring ones. In jepo^eo.8'
New York alone the frontier had not been moved west-
ward ; and here it was the presence of the Iroquois in the Mohawk
valley, allies of the English and useful in operations against the
French and Algonquins, that kept the whites from some of the rich-
est land on the continent. Throughout the settlements plenty pre-
vailed, land was cheap, and no man who worked need fear want ; large
families were the rule, and no parent was anxious lest there should be
no opportunity for his children. Under such conditions population
increased rapidly, by birth and through immigration. In 1690 it was
about 220,000, and in 1760 it reached 1,500,000.
TYPICAL COLONIAL CONTROVERSIES
This narrative cannot deal with the political struggles of all the
colonies. Interesting as the stories would be they lead to one end, the
evolution of a colonial party ; and in the royal provinces
the common keynote of the contests is opposition to royal j
prerogative. In the proprietary colonies it is resistance JJJonial
to the will of the proprietor, and in the liberally chartered Parties,
colonies of Connecticut and Rhode Island its traces are
found in the common opposition to the British laws relating to trade.
Everywhere the spirit of self-government is apparent. What the parli-
ament was to England the assembly under the restrictions of its charter
aspired to be to the colony. If we consider some of the more notable
controversies, we shall see in what manner they looked forward to the
ultimate assertion of independence.
Governor Phips, the first royal governor of Massachusetts, opened
a long quarrel with the assembly when he published his instructions
from the king directing him to get the assembly to vote
a permanent appropriation for the salaries of the governor controver-
and other officials appointed by the crown. For the sies
assembly to comply was to relinquish its best source of
power, and the request was ignored. On the contrary, bills assertive
of fundamental rights and laws establishing courts were passed, all
of which were vetoed in England. This only confirmed The
the assembly in its determination to keep a firm hand on Governor's
the purse-strings. Phips urged the lawmakers to vote Salary in
a regular salary, but they would only give 500 pounds ^^sa
for services already rendered. To Bellomont, his succes-
sor by royal appointment, they gave 1000 pounds for two years' serv-
ice. This way of granting money after the completion of a given
102 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
time was thought to be useful in keeping the governor friendly to the
colony. In 1702 Joseph Dudley became governor, and ruled fourteen
years. He tried in vain to relieve himself from the necessity of taking
his remuneration at the discretion of the assembly. At the end of
his term of office they had voted him 6950 pounds. In asserting
his right to veto acts of assembly he disallowed the election, as
speaker, of Thomas Oakes, one of the most astute leaders of the
opposition. He claimed that such an election was in the nature of
an act of the legislature. A bitter controversy arose, and continued
until, in 1725, in a so-called explanatory charter, the king ordered that
the election of speaker should be subject to the governor's approval.
The assembly thought it expedient to accept the restriction. The
salary controversy, continued under Shute (1716-1728), came to a
climax under Burnet (1728-1729). He was instructed to insist on
a regular salary of at least 1000 pounds, and the assembly was told
that if it were not granted the charter would be in danger. The reply
of the colony was to offer the governor 1700 pounds as a gift, but he
was forced to decline it, even when the sum was raised to 3000 pounds.
The controversy now became warm, but in the midst of it Burnet
came to his death from the oversetting of his carriage in the water,
and the assembly showed its favor by voting 2000 pounds to his
children. Under Governor Belcher, his successor, the dispute was
compromised, 1731, when the assembly came to vote the governor's
salary annually, but at the beginning and not at the end of each year.
New York and South Carolina in the eighteenth century began to
grant the governor's salary year by year, and spite of the protests of
the Board of Trade the custom was maintained. In Virginia and the
Carolinas the salaries were provided for in general taxes, which did
not depend on the annual votes of the assemblies.
Closely connected with this controversy was the claim made by
most of the assemblies that they, like the English House of Commons,
had the sole right to initiate money bills. The Council,
sembiS~and usua^y appointed by the king, had the right to approve
Money BUls. a^ kills. an<^ this made it an upper chamber of the legis-
lature. It usually supported the governor and warred
against the assembly. The latter body, by insisting on its control
over money bills, assumed a position of superiority, and its good will
was so necessary to the success of any governor's administration that
it finally won the recognition of its claim.
In New York the legislative controversy was also prominent, and
here it was concerned with money bills in general. The failure of the
legislature of 1683 was resented by the people, and Leisler recognized
the fact by calling an assembly. It authorized him to
New York act in the emergency> and tne m'ght of Nicholson left him
in supreme power. The council resented his assumption
of authority, and he drove them from his presence as persons " Popishly
THE STRUGGLE IN NEW YORK 103
affected, Dogs and Rogues." For him, a man of the people, the aris-
tocratic councillors had no tolerance ; and he returned their contempt
with interest. But he was a popular leader and kept a semblance of
order in the turbulent population of Manhattan. Having proclaimed
William and Mary he expected some recognition of his services ; but
his sovereigns ignored him and appointed Henry Sloughter governor.
They also sent to New York a body of troops under Ingoldesby with
instructions to restore order. Ingoldesby arrived before the new gov-
ernor landed and demanded the surrender of the fort. He showed no
written orders, and Leisler refused to yield. Then Sloughter came and
demanded the delivery of the fort, also without showing his authority.
After some hesitation Leisler retired. He was arrested for treason,
tried by a special court over which Joseph Dudley presided, sentenced
to death, and executed. Tradition has it that Sloughter signed the
death warrant while drunk. Be that as it may, Sloughter died a few
weeks afterwards, a victim of inebriety. Leisler had his faults, but
he did not deserve death, and leaving him a victim to hatred of his
enemies is a blot on the reputation of the British government.
Sloughter was instructed to summon an assembly " according to the
usage " of the other colonies. He and his successors took this to
mean that they might at will summon, prorogue, dissolve,
and apportion the membership of the lawmaking body. Struggle for
An obedient assembly was thus kept long in power, in ^^ew™1
one case for eleven years. But not many assemblies York,
were obedient, and one of their most common protests
was to demand frequent elections. Their persistence won a measure
of success in 1743, when a colonial law was approved by the king,
making it necessary to have a new election once in seven years.
In 1692 the New York assembly began a long controversy over the
right to vote money. A committee was appointed to investigate the
expenditure of money in support of frontier defense.
Its real business was to see if the governor, whose salary The Control
the assembly would not vote in a regular way, was not votes^7
making up the deficiency by diverting to his own use New York,
some of the funds appropriated to support the gar-
rison. The committee could do nothing because the governor
did not allow them to see the muster-rolls and accounts. The next
assembly (1694) was determined to have its way, and resolved that it
would do no business until it had inspected the accounts. Governor
Fletcher demurred for a while, but at last sent them the books of the
receiver-general. From this time forward the assembly regularly
inspected the accounts and might know how the money it had appro-
priated was spent.
In 1702-1708 Edward Hyde, Lord Cornbury, was New York's gov-
ernor. Without public or private morals, he left a stain on the gov-
ernorship blacker than was left by any predecessor or successor. He
104 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
was cousin-german of Queen Anne, whom he resembled, and was
said to have appeared in woman's clothes to show colonial society
what the queen looked like. The assembly voted money
NewYo?km to fortify the harbor of New York> but at tne next ses-
sion it appeared that he had diverted most of it to his own
use, although he had been voted a present of 2000 pounds to pay the
expenses of coming to his post. The deed was possible because all
money hitherto voted was to the king to be used for the province, and
once it was in the hands of a royal official it might be taken for
governor's salary or any other purpose authorized by the king. Pre-
ceding governors had followed this practice, but not so flagrantly, and
the assembly seized the opportunity to check it. A resolu-
Treasu^er ^on Passe<^ to vote no rnore money except such as was
paid out by a treasurer appointed by the assembly and
responsible to it. The position was so reasonable that the authorities
in England approved it so far as extraordinary grants went. After that
the assembly assumed that most appropriations were extraordinary.
Nor was the Quaker Commonwealth free from controversy. Penn's
humane ideals never failed him, but they were better suited for an
Political infant community than for the large province he soon had
Change in on his hands. So many repqrts of dissension reached him
Pennsyl- that in 1699 ne returned to Philadelphia, hoping, he said,
vama. to en(j ^s ^ayg there. He found the people divided.
Quary, surveyor-general of the royal revenue, complained that the
navigation laws were not enforced, the people complained that the
Eroprietor did not develop the colony or keep his promises in granting
inds, while the proprietor could reply that the people did not pay quit-
rents and that the colony itself had impoverished its owner. More
than all, the three counties which became Delaware were in dispute
over their rights in the colonial assembly. To all the malcontents
Penn made earnest pleas for moderation. The upshot was "The
Charter of Privileges," passed by the assembly and council and ap-
proved by Penn in 1 701 on the eve of his departure for England, whither
he was called by the news that Parliament was about to abolish all the
proprietary colonies. This "charter" represents the experience of
Americans as it was worked out at that time in the problems of self-
government in the New World. If any other colony had been allowed
to revise its constitution on the basis of what it had discoverd through
its own struggles the result would probably have been much like that
in Pennsylvania, where the mild proprietor was not much of a weight
on the constitution-makers.
Penn's "Charter" provided for four representatives elected by
the freemen of each county to make up an assembly,
wn^cn wnen it met was to elect its own officers, pass on the
qualification of its members, prepare bills, and have all
rights of an assembly chosen by " free-born subjects of England." The
PROGRESS IN PENNSYLVANIA 105
appointment of governor and councillors remained with the proprietor,
all who believed in God were to have freedom of conscience, and all
Christians could hold office. In 1705 a supplementary
act provided that only Protestants could be members of 3 Beware to
the assembly. The dispute with Delaware was settled by separate
allowing it to have a separate assembly from Pennsylvania ; Assembly,
but each colony remained under Penn's jurisdiction, and
the " Charter" embodied the government of each until the revolu-
tion. It was the habit, also, for the same governor to rule over each
colony.
Probably from an early date the Quakers were less than a majority
of the population of Pennsylvania, but they were the most influential
portion ; and their peculiar belief brought some annoying
situations into existence. For example, they refused to Qf°^on
take oaths, and sometimes even to administer them. They Quakers.
passed laws to allow witnesses in court to affirm, but these
were disallowed by the king, who, by the original charter, reserved to
himself the approval of laws. Then the assembly renewed their enact-
ment, incorporating it in the law creating courts so that its Ag to Oathg
veto, which followed, left the colony without judicial tri-
bunals. This was no great inconvenience to the Quakers, for they
usually settled their disputes among themselves ; but it worked hard-
ship on others. In 1718 the contest ended with a compromise:
the assembly adopted the severe English penal code and in the
same bill allowed affirmations ; and the kijig approved their action.
From the beginning of their history the Quakers opposed war ; from
which it followed that the colony not only had no militia system, but
it refused to vote money to erect forts on the frontier.
Its pacific relations with the Indians warranted this course J^^—
so far as internal problems were concerned ; but when service.
French influence in the Ohio valley created external prob-
lems, over which Quaker good will could exert no direction, the non-
resistance principles of Pennsylvania became a serious danger. At
this time Benjamin Franklin had become a force in the colony, and
when in 1739 the assembly refused to raise a militia at the request of
the king, he started an association to establish a volunteer organiza-
tion. From a lottery he got funds to build fortifications. His action
was approved by practical men, and weakened the opposition of the
Quaker party. In 1745 the assembly appropriated 4000 pounds for
"bread, beef, pork, flour, wheat or other grain" in support of the
garrison in newly captured Louisburg. The governor used part of it
to buy gunpowder on the ground that it was "other grain," and his
action caused so little scandal that in 1746 the assembly voted the king
5000 pounds without stipulating the purpose for which it was to be
used, although it was well known that it would be used for military
defense.
io6 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
From this time we may consider the religious motive in the matter a
subordinate one; but it was replaced by a political motive. In 1754
the Indians and French were raiding on the western frontier
S sfem"1 anc^ ^ was necessarv f°r the militia system to be taken
Established. under public control. The assembly would do nothing
unless the estates of the proprietor were taxed. They
referred to the large amount of his unsold land from which he had no
revenue, and through his influence the law failed. Then came the
defeat of Braddock, followed by frontier outrages. So strong a cry
went up from the non-Quaker inhabitants that the ministry in London
heard it and brought a bill into Parliament to require members of the
Pennsylvania assembly to take the oath of allegiance. This would
effectually exclude Quakers from that body. Alarmed at the prospect
of a permanent discrimination, they now decided to yield temporarily.
Through the intervention of friends the bill was withdrawn from Parlia-
ment and the Quakers in the colony agreed not to stand for election
to the next assembly. In a legislature thus purged of old ideas it was
easy to pass laws for a militia and for fortifications.
Penn's last days were full of financial troubles, to which were added
mental infirmities. He died in 1718, leaving his colony to his four sons,
for whom his widow acted until her death in 1726. Two
Later His- of fae sons, John and Thomas, resided in Philadelphia,
Pennft the former for one and ^e latter for fifteen years. The
Family. development of the province made the proprietors very
rich, and the djemand that they should pay taxes on their
lands became strong. They resisted successfully, since they controlled
the governorship. In 1763 John Penn, grandson of the founder, be-
came governor, and continued in office until the Revolution. The later
Penns returned to the Church of England, which tended to widen the
breach between the family and the colonists. In 1778 the state of
Pennsylvania annulled the charter and allowed the proprietors 130,000
pounds in lieu of their rights. Later, 1786, a supplementary grant
was made to them, and the king himself gave an annuity of 4000
pounds.
The history of Pennsylvania shows the proprietary colony at its
best : that of Carolina shows it at its worst. The eight proprietors
knew nothing of their colony, which they did not visit.
MterSekf They had no Other mterest in it: tlian to §et monev> and
Carolina.m when that failed they ceased to pay attention to its
needs. They had no military force with which to pre-
serve order or to enforce their own rights. By 1690 the shares had
passed for the most part into the hands of a group of merchants who
were as much disappointed as their predecessors with the enterprise.
Meanwhile the people of the colony grew in numbers and prosperity.
About 1 690 the northern settlements began to be called North Carolina.
In that year a governor was appointed for the first time for all Carolina,
NORTH CAROLINA AND THE CROWN 107
with authority to appoint a deputy governor for the northern settle-
ments. In 1714 Charles Eden was made governor of North Carolina
without reference to the governor of South Carolina.
At this time North Carolina was in serious commotion. Carolina
Its population was strongly dissenting, among them
many Quakers. The official class were of the Church of England,
and by tendering the oaths of supremacy to the Quakers elected to
the assembly they could rule the colony. The result was a social
revolt, the mass of poor men arrayed against the aristo-
crats and conservatives. After seven years of commotion ,
if i i 11. mi ^ i Rebellion,
the former had a leader in Thomas Gary, who, in 1711, took
up arms, but was defeated and captured with the aid of troops from
Virginia. Immediately afterwards came an Indian war in which
only aid sent from Charleston enabled the whites to
triumph. In 1715 South Carolina had a fierce struggle
of her own and received valuable aid from her northern caroUnas
sister. Thus the Carolinas passed safely through that
stern Indian struggle which came to most colonies when the
savages realized the significance of the white man's advance into
the interior.
In 1729 seven of the proprietors sold their rights to the crown. The
one remaining was Carteret, later Earl of Grenville. In 1743 he re-
ceived in lieu of his rights as proprietor a broad belt of land in the
northern part of North Carolina, to have in fee the ungranted parts
and to collect the quitrents on the granted portion. This vast estate
was not to be managed without serious trouble in a community in
which the rights of feudal proprietors were not tenderly regarded.
But the conversion of the two colonies into royal provinces was bene-
ficial to their development.
Five royal governors ruled in North Carolina, and the pathway of
each was strewn with thorns. The most continual quarrel was in
regard to the payment of quitrents. These were a per-
petual obligation imposed on land when first granted and The Quit-
to be paid by whomever owned the land. They do not
mean that the grantee did not have fee-simple title, as
has sometimes been assumed, but were in the nature of a Carolina,
permanent land tax. To pay them was irksome to the
settlers, who found many ways of evasion. One difficulty was that
they were payable in tobacco or other produce, and that the expense
of collecting from small farmers ate up the value of the proceeds. To
obviate this the governor ordered that quitrents be paid at certain
specified places. The inhabitants protested, and a law passed the as-
sembly to authorize payment at the home of the landowner, where most
other rents were paid. The governor vetoed the bill, and a deadlock
resulted. For many years the revenue from quitrents was very
slender.
io8 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
Meanwhile, South Carolina grew in wealth through the cultivation
of rice and indigo. Great numbers of negro slaves were imported, so
that in 1719 there were 12,000 to a white population of
South.688 m 9°°°- The accumulation of wealth gave society an aris-
Caroiina. tocratic tone, and Charleston became a seat of elegance
and luxury. One result was to lessen respect for the weak
authority of the proprietors, and about 1716 a series of reforms began.
Hitherto all the elections were held in Charleston and all freemen were
allowed to vote. It was claimed that persons in the interests of the
proprietors thus controlled the elections, going so far as to allow In-
dians and non-resident sailors to vote in order to carry their cause. In
1716 the Indian war was just over. The proprietors had contributed
nothing to the defense of the colony, and their influence in the assembly
was low. The moment was favorable for election reforms, and a law
passed directing that future elections be held in the parishes with a
small property restriction for voters, thus shifting the center of power
from the Charlestonians to the planter class. The same assembly de-
cided to appoint its own receiver for taxes paid by the In-
Overthrow dian traders. Both laws were promptly vetoed by the
taryTRule~ proprietors, together with a previous law levying duties.
The people were in a rebellious mood, when news circulated
of an expected attack from the Spanish in Florida. The governor
called out the militia, who at once constituted themselves an army of
revolt against the proprietary regime. New elections of the assembly
had been held, and the members met, resolved themselves into a con-
vention, after the example of the convention parliament of 1689, re-
pudiated the authority of the proprietors, and asked the king to rule
the colony as a royal province. The quickness with which the Board
of Trade acceded to this request gives some strength to the suspicion
that it connived at the revolution in the first instance. The pro-
prietors, however, retained their rights to the land until the two col-
onies were sold to the king in 1729.
In its new capacity, South Carolina had peace, and developed in
wealth. Great slave plantations became the rule, whereas in North
Carolina small farms were prevalent. In 1717 the popu-
CaroUnas lati°n °f the two colonies was about 19,000 and 9000 re-
Compared, spectively, in 1760 it was 100,000 and 93,000. Within
this period the slave population grew from 12,000 to 70,000
in South Carolina and from an inconsiderable number, probably 1500,
to 16,000 in North Carolina. The latter colony was ever noted for its
democratic conditions. It had no good harbors and no staple products
out of which riches could be gathered. It was a land of simple abun-
dance and the refuge of those who wished to avoid the aristocratic con-
ditions of the neighboring colonies'.
THE WORK OF OGLETHORPE 109
GEORGIA FOUNDED
What Penn was to the Quaker colony General James Oglethorpe
was to Georgia. As a member of parliament, philanthropist, and
colony planter, few men of his day deserve more our re- Q ^^
spect. His sympathy was drawn to the inmates of the
debtors' prisons, and he wished to plant a colony in which they
might begin life anew. Many noblemen, clergymen, and others sup-
ported the plan, and in 1732 the king by charter created the Georgia
"Trustees," a company to plant a colony between the Savannah river
and Florida. The king and his advisers were opposed to proprietary
governments in general, but they relaxed their opposition
in this case because the new colony would make a " buffer " ^Q^JJf^J7
between South Carolina and the Spanish possessions. But projected*
as a matter of simple precaution it was provided that the
charter should expire in twenty-one years, after which Georgia
would become a royal province.
The trustees lost no time in announcing their plans of settlement.
Recent affairs in South Carolina showed that when slaves far exceeded
the white population the capacity of defense was lessened, and it
was determined to exclude slavery from Georgia. With an eye, also,
to the character of the expected debtor immigrants it was provided
that one person should own no more than 500 acres of land and that
grants should be strictly entailed to male heirs, in default of which
they should revert to the trustees. While these regulations may have
been warranted by the conditions they were devised to meet, they could
only discourage the immigration of normally competent persons.
Every colony in America had an abundance of land for those who
would take it, and a new colony in an exposed position could not ex-
pect to have settlers unless it offered liberal terms. The prohibition
of slavery was well intended by the trustees, but it displeased the
actual settlers, who sent to England urgent pleas for the repeal of the
regulation. They saw how men prospered in South Carolina through
slave labor and resented the arbitrary power which kept them from
the same fortune.
In January, 1733, Oglethorpe, who was appointed governor, arrived
in Charleston with the first Georgia colony, about one hundred men,
women, and children. Indian treaties were made by
which the Creeks, inhabiting the Georgia coast, ceded settled*
the site of . Savannah and took the settlers for allies.
Other English settlers came slowly ; the trustees, like other proprietors
of colonies, spent little money on the enterprise after the enthusiasm
of launching it was gone. Only a small proportion of those who went
over were debtors. In 1734 a company of Protestants from Salzburg
arrived, and later on other Germans landed. Another source of popu-
no COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
lation was the Scotch Highlanders, who settled along the Altamaha.
In 1760 the population was only 9000, of whom 3000 were slaves.
The colony was planted in defiance of Spain's claim to all the coast
as far north as Charleston. Oglethorpe ignored her protests and
challenged the Spaniards by erecting a fort at Frederica,
an^thr56 the soutliern extremity of his charter limits. He even
Spaniards, went so far as to found small posts as far as the St. John's
river, within the bounds of Florida. So threatening
became the situation that he went to England for assistance. He
was authorized to raise a regiment, and returned to Georgia, 1738,
with instructions not to fight until attacked. In 1739 began a war
with Spain. Oglethorpe now marched against St. Augustine, but
withdrew after a short siege. In 1742 the Spaniards retaliated by
sending a strong expedition against Frederica. Oglethorpe had a
force much inferior, but by utilizing favorable natural defenses drove
off the invaders. The end of the war, 1748, found Georgia undisturbed
by Spain, and thenceforth disappeared any doubts of the success of
the new colony.
Now comes in to greater prominence the protests of the settlers against
the paternal restrictions of the well-intentioned trustees. George
Whitfield, the missionary, who had founded an orphanage
Removed*118 m Georgia, was one of those who urged the free admission
of slaves. So strong was the cry of the objectors that
one by one the restrictions were removed. In 1749 the importation
of slaves was allowed, with certain safeguards as to the proportions
of slave and free population. In 1750 the objectionable restrictions
on land owning were removed, and at the same time the importation
of rum, hitherto forbidden, was allowed. These relaxations gave
greater freedom to individual enterprise, and the result was favorable.
The early government of Georgia was very paternal, as became a
colony founded for the inmates of debtors' prisons. There was no
assembly, laws were made by the trustees, resident in
England, and the governor had extensive powers. When
Oglethorpe at last went to England, 1743, a president
and four assistants were left in charge. In 1751 an assembly was
summoned. It was not to make laws, however, but to suggest
them to the trustees. At this time Oglethorpe and his associates were
discouraged with their attempts to govern men more wisely than
they could govern themselves. In view of the approaching termina-
tion of their charter, 1753, they thought it well to surrender their
authority over the colony. Thus Georgia became a royal province
and prospered under a governor, council, and assembly.
COLIGNY'S FLORIDA COLONY IX1
GROWTH OF NEW FRANCE
While the English gradually extended their agricultural settle-
ments from the coast to the Alleghanies, France was establishing a
less solid occupation in the Mississippi Basin. Her flag
was carried forward by traders, who at wide intervals English and
built forts occupied by small garrisons. Such occupancy Ration00'
did not alarm the natives. In fact, it pleased them ; for
the game was not driven away, and an abundance of manufactured
goods and a convenient market for furs were assured. To main-
tain the forts was expensive, and if war should come, the defense
of the vast region must be made by troops sent from Canada or
France. The French power, therefore, was not so well rooted in the
soil as that of England on the coast.
The beginning of French colonization in America was in the six-
teenth century, when Coligny, the Huguenot leader, made an unsuc-
cessful attempt to establish in "Florida" a refuge for his
coreligionists. In 1562 he sent out Ribaut, a bold
mariner, to explore the coast and select a place for settle- « Florida."
ment. Ribaut was delighted with the country, and left
thirty men at Port Royal harbor in a rude palisade, called "Charle-
fort" for Charles IX. Idleness and want soon brought them to
mutiny, and they escaped to Europe in a boat of their own construc-
tion. Starving and reduced to cannibalism, they at last sighted the
French shore, only to be made captives by an English vessel which
happened to be near.
Coligny was not discouraged, and in 1564 sent out a colony under
Laudonniere. It settled at the mouth of St. John's river and built
Fort Caroline, named, like its predecessor, in honor
of the king. Hunger and discontent soon appeared, and Second
the colony was on the verge of ruin when a second expedi-
tion brought supplies and restored the spirits of the
people. What would have followed does not appear;
for a greater danger than any hitherto encountered was at hand.
The Spaniards of Cuba had heard of the settlement, and September 19,
1565, Pedro Menendez, with a strong Spanish force, surprised the
fort and slew the Frenchmen who did not escape to the forest or declare
themselves Catholics. Leaving a garrison on the site, he founded
St. Augustine, fifty miles southward. The Florida coast commanded
the route by which Spanish treasure ships returned from the Gulf
of Mexico, and it was not to be left in the hands of a foreign power.
News of Menendez's atrocities caused great commotion in France,
and in the spring of 1568 Dominique de Gourgues appeared at
Fort Caroline. He surprised the garrison, slew those who re-
sisted, and hanged the prisoners. Over the slain Huguenot?
H2 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
Menendez had put up this notice: "I do this not as to Frenchmen
but as to Lutherans." De Gourgues left over the dangling bodies
of the Spaniards this inscription: "I do this not as to Spaniards,
nor as to Marranos, but as to traitors, robbers, and to murderers."
But for all this St. Augustine continued to exist and Florida remained
a Spanish colony.
In Canada, where Cartier's explorations, 1534, 1535, and 1541,
had given France a claim by right of prior discovery, French coloniza-
tion fared better. Fur traders continued to visit the
St. Lawrence, but no other impetus toward planting
toward settlements was seen until the region came under the
Canada. eyes of Champlain, who arrived as the guest of a trader
in 1603. From that time his interest was keenly aroused.
The next year he returned with De Monts,who had a charter to plant
a colony in La Cadie, or Acadia, as the French had called the region
from northern Nova Scotia to Philadelphia. A settlement made
at Douchet Island proved unsatisfactory, and the colonists moved
Cham lain to ^ neighborhood of Annapolis, where they managed
to withstand the cold and perils of the forest for many
years. De Monts, however, was discouraged, and withdrew from the
undertaking. But Champlain's zeal was unabated. What he had
seen only made him love the long stretches of shore and forest along
which he sailed for many a day. In 1608 he returned to
Founded plant a trading colony at Quebec, which his discerning
1608. eye selected as the key to the St. Lawrence valley. Fur
trading supported his colony, but his adventurous spirit
sought other fields. The Indians around him, Algonquins, were at
feud with the Iroquois, and Champlain was induced to aid them.
Early in 1609 he, with two other whites, joined a war party going
southward. He eventually reached the lake which now has his
name, and on its shore a battle was fought. As the Iroquois advanced
across a plain, Champlain in full armor showed himself, shot two
Indians dead, and wounded another. A third was killed by one of
the other whites, and the savages fled. From that time the French
settlements in Canada had the hostility of the powerful
tiieSiroquois Iroquois Confederacy. Champlain had naturally thought
best to make friends with the Indians among whom he
had settled, and for many years his action produced no bad results ;
but there came a time when the French wished to extend their influence
into the region now known as western New York, and were pre-
vented by Iroquoian hostility. By this small occurrence in 1609
the eastern and southern shores of Lakes Ontario and Erie were
kept out of French hands and made accessible at the proper time to
the English-speaking people.
New France, as the St. Lawrence region was now called, grew
slowly. It was only a series of trading posts, and so little concerned
THE JESUITS IN NEW FRANCE 113
with agriculture that in 1628, when war interrupted communi-
cation with Europe, only one family in Quebec had raised
enough food to support it through the winter. In 1660 ?low
there were 3000 white settlers, including the fishing posts New France,
'in Acadia. In 1629 Quebec was taken by the English,
but Charles I restored it to France. Champlain died at Quebec
in 1635.
It was about this time that the Jesuits turned their attention to
Canada. They proposed to convert and civilize the Indians, and
thus establish French power in the Lake region while
they delivered into French hands an immense fur trade.
With the Algonquins on the St. Lawrence they were
easily successful : then they sent missions to the Hurons, on the shores
of the lake which now bears their name, and here, after some delays,
they also succeeded. With the Iroquois they could, for a long time,
make no headway. It is not probable that an Indian nation under
French influence, however civilized, could have kept the English
permanently out of the region south of Lake Erie ; and it is certain
that the Iroquois, through their hostility to everything French,
defeated the hopes of the Jesuits and made easier the progress of the
English. But the work of the priests commands our esteem. They
went without hesitation into the most dangerous places, giving up
their lives as readily to torture as to disease. Their "Relations,"
reports of their experiences, were published contemporaneously in
France and stimulated popular interest in Canada, while for posterity
they are a valuable source of knowledge of Indian life. On the savages
themselves the missionaries exerted a good influence. The tendency
to make war continually was lessened, the most barbarous forms of
torturing captives disappeared, and their general antipathy toward
the whites was softened. On the other hand, the power of the Jesuits
was used to promote French dominion, and some of the most cruel
raids against the New England frontier were instigated by priests.
Let us now turn to the Iroquois, for many years the foes of the
Jesuits. Five nations, the Mohawks on the east, and next in order,
the Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas made
up the Confederacy. A sixth nation, the Tuscaroras,
of North Carolina, did not join the Confederacy until
1713. In the time of Champlain the strength of the Iroquois was
about 2500 warriors; but superior central organization, with the
courage of the men, made it the most powerful Indian organization
of the North Atlantic coast. The wars against the French and the
Algonquins were usually led by the Mohawks, those against the Hurons
by the Senecas. By 1650 the Hurons were broken and dispersed, and
by 1750 the Iroquoian authority through a series of wars was imposed
in a loose way over all the western tribes as far as Lake Michigan,
the Illinois, and the Mississippi, and southward to the northern
ii4 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
limits of the present states of Mississippi and Alabama. Armed by
the Dutch, the Mohawks and neighboring nations made life wretched
for the French and Algonquins on the St. Lawrence. In 1665 Loui^
XIV sent a fine regiment to America to chastise this fierce enemy.
In two fruitless expeditions it destroyed some villages which the
inhabitants had abandoned, and only succeeded in stimulating the
Mohawks' hatred of France. At this time (1664) New York passed
into English hands. Its new masters early appreciated the importance
of Iroquoian friendship, and in 1684, in a memorable treaty at Albany,
induced them to acknowledge themselves English subjects.
Governor Dongan, of New York, thereupon informed
the governor of Canada that the province of New York
included the Iroquois lands, and caused the arms of the Duke of York
to be affixed to walls of the Iroquois towns. The reply was a French
invasion which accomplished nothing. For the time it was believed
that the French would make a determined attempt against New
York, which was not able to offer serious resistance. It was partly
to have a consolidated force strong enough to meet this danger that
James II created the short-lived Dominion of New England. France
and England were now keenly alive to the importance of their Amer-
ican possessions, and their -wars for the next seventy years always
kindled the conflict on the American frontier. But that part of our
story must be deferred while we consider the extension of French
authority in the Mississippi valley.
The missionaries to the Hurons were the first Frenchmen to have
knowledge of the rich country beyond Lake Erie. Though driven
out of it by the dispersion of the Indians, they kept alive
^e knowledge of its wonders. In 1673 Father Marquette,
member of the indomitable society, and Joliet, a trader,
going through this country, came to the Wisconsin river, down which
they took their canoes until they came to the Mississippi, which they
followed to the mouth of the Arkansas. They desired to reach the
salt sea, but prudently turned back lest they fall into Spanish hands
and knowledge of their discovery perish with them.
What they failed to do was achieved by La Salle, one of the most
intrepid of the French explorers. He wished to organize the fur trade
La Salle on t^ie ^a^es' an<^ ^rom ^e Pronts carry on extensive
discoveries in the region beyond. A license was obtained
from the king, and money was subscribed by friends, but the opposition
of Quebec merchants and the Jesuits was a severe impediment. Before
complete ruin overtook his scheme he set out in December, 1681,
to follow the "Great River" of Marquette and Joliet to the sea.
With him were Tonti, a faithful friend, and fifty- three others, French-
men and Indians. From Lake Michigan they ascended the Chicago
to its source and thence by portage to the Illinois, down which they
reached the Mississippi, and April 6 they passed out one of its sluggish
THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER 115
mouths to the Gulf of Mexico. The Indians were friendly and as-
sured La Salle that he was the first white man to explore the river ;
he took possession of its banks in the name of the king of France.
News of his achievement aroused enthusiasm in France, and in 1684
he set out with a colony and four ships, fitted out by the king, to settle
at the mouth of the Mississippi. After many hardships he landed on
the Texas coast, whence he started overland to find the river he
had traversed and to communicate with Tonti, whom he expected
to arrive from Canada. In the interior he was murdered H- D h
by his own men, 1687, and of his followers only a few
survived starvation on the great plains or escaped the hands of the
Spaniards.
La Salle's unfinished work was taken up in 1698 by dTberville
and his brother, Bienville, both notable men in New France. In
January, 1699, they arrived by sea and planted a trading
post at Biloxi, on the mainland near the mouth of the
river. Bienville was governor, and the country was called
Louisiana, for Louis XIV. For many years the fate of
the place seemed doubtful. The Indian trade was engrossed by the
English and Spaniards, and the colonists were not inclined to become
agriculturists. In 1712 the monopoly of the Louisiana trade
was granted for fifteen years to Crozat, but he managed it so badly
that it yielded small returns. Five years later the colony, including
trade privileges and the ownership of ungranted lands, passed into
the hands of Law's Mississippi Company. Its immense possibilities,
which were carefully exploited by the adventurers, gave a basis of
confidence to the company ; but the final collapse was certain. Before
it came, however, New Orleans was founded, 1718, and became
the seat of government of Louisiana. In 1731 the company gave
up its rights, and the colony was thenceforth governed by the crown.
It had no popular assembly, but the authority was in the hands of
a governor with local courts, from the decisions of which appeal lay
to the king. The population grew slowly, and by the middle of the
century it was not more than six thousand, one third being slaves.
At this time St. Louis, Natchez, and several other interior posts had
been established.
THE FRENCH AND INDIAN WARS
Three great Frenchmen influenced the history of New France late
in the seventeenth century, — Louis XIV, Colbert, his minister, and
Frontenac, twice governor of Canada, 1672 to 1682 and
1 689 until his death in 1 698. The first and second acted to-
gether, creating in 1664 a consolidated company with trade
monopoly for all the French colonies. To it the king offered bounties
for all goods exported or imported and generous assistance in the
n6 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
early years of the enterprise. To encourage infant industries liberal
grants were made, immigration was stimulated, marriage was en-
. couraged, and large families were rewarded in many
anTcoibert. wavs- Louis XIV watched eagerly the reports of Canadian
population. They could have given him little comfort
for all he had spent, since in 1679 the colony contained but 9400
whites, and there were only 6983 horned cattle, 719 sheep, and
145 horses. Colbert died in 1683, but his policy in Canada was
continued.
Frontenac was chiefly notable for his ability in dealing with the
Iroquois. In 1673 he made a treaty with them and built a fort where
Kingston now stands. He said that with a vessel on
Plans611 Lake Erie and a fort on the Niagara he could now control
the upper lakes. The ship, the Griffon, was built
by La Salle, but was wrecked on her first voyage. Frontenac supported
La Salle's trading enterprise and thus incurred the opposition of the
Quebec traders, whose profits were affected. He also incurred the
hostility of the Jesuits, whose power by this time was overwhelming.
Combining their efforts, his enemies secured his removal in 1682. His
successors renewed the war with the Iroquois, who were thus thrown
back on the English for support.
By this time the French were aware of the vast possibilities of the
interior parts of North America. Of the three river valleys that
conduct thither they held two, the St. Lawrence and the
T>ra°CC th Mississippi, and it seemed necessary to seize the other,
Hudson the Hudson, ere it was able to defy them. To do so
would cut the English settlements in twain and go far
toward expelling English authority from the continent. Moreover,
the opportunity to realize these plans seemed to come when in 1689
France began war with England on account of the overthrow of
James II by William of Orange.
Her first care was to send Frontenac back to Canada as governor,
and he immediately turned his attention to winning over the Iroquois.
In order to impress them with French prowess he sent
Liam's^W'ar t^iree expeditions against the English frontier. February
1690^1697? 9> 169°, a force of Frenchmen and Indians surprised
Schenectady, near Albany, slew 60 whites and led away
27 captives. The second force attacked and destroyed the village
of Salmon Falls, New Hampshire, and the third took Fort Loyal,
where Portland, Maine, now stands. Each of these
affairs was conducted with much cruelty, and cries for
vengeance arose from all the northern colonies. A
congress of delegates from Massachusetts, Connecticut, Plymouth,
and New York convened in May, 1690, and planned a retaliatory
expedition to take Quebec. It was agreed that New York and Connec-
ticut should raise an army and attack Montreal by way of Lake
KING WILLIAM'S WAR 117
Champlain. Massachusetts was asked to cooperate by sending a
naval force against Quebec. To this request her delegates would
not positively agree. At that moment a fleet of her
armed merchantmen, under the command of Sir William
Phips, was engaged in an expedition against Port Royal, in
Acadia, a nest from which had gone forth many privateers.
Soon Phips appeared in Boston laden with booty and reporting that
Port Royal had been subdued and its inhabitants forced
to take oaths of loyalty to William and Mary. So great
was the enthusiasm that the colony decided to send a
strong force against Quebec, believing that a bold stroke would end
the French peril in that quarter once for all.
While Massachusetts made ready her attack, the army of the other
colonies had assembled and set out for Montreal. Dissension appeared,
smallpox was discovered, the Iroquois allies did not keep
their promises, and the expedition was abandoned at J ~re °:
T i /-ii i • A e± -™ • j f "*e Counter-
Lake Champlain. After many delays Phips started for stroke.
Quebec August 9, 1690. He had no pilot who knew the
St. Lawrence, and as he groped his way through its course news of his
movements was carried to Frontenac, who barely had time to collect
his forces at Quebec, most of them having been drawn off to Montreal
to meet the expected attack there. The Massachusetts men landed
1 200 strong and laid siege to the town. Their commander lacked the
ability of his opponent, and soon disease and discouragement reigned
in the army. Cold weather now approached, and it was decided
to return to Boston. Had Phips acted vigorously at first, it is prob-
able that the town would have been taken. The expedition cost the
colony dearly both in money and in the men who died from disease.
The war now waged was called in the colonies "King William's
War." It lasted until 1697, when peace came with the Treaty of
Ryswick between France and England. No large expedi-
tion marked the further course of the struggle on either
side in America, but Indian forays were continuous.
The New England borders, from Northampton to Pemaquid, suffered
severely. In 1697 Haver hill was captured with scenes of bloodshed.
One of the captives was Hannah Dustin. Led away toward Canada,
she watched her opportunity, slew her captors, and escaped to her
friends. Her achievement was long a source of inspiration to the
frontier women of America. During this war the Iroquois suffered
severely at the hands of the French. Two strong expeditions were
sent against them by Frontenac, and it was reported by the French
that their fighting men were reduced to half their former
number. In 1694 they were willing to make peace with 0^^^°
France, but Frontenac refused unless the Indian allies of
the French were included, — terms the Iroquois would not accept.
In maintaining the good will of these savages the services of Peter
n8 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
Schuyler, of Albany, were most valuable to the English. The treaty
of peace left affairs as they were at the beginning of the war.
In 1701 began the War of the Spanish Succession, whose American
phase was called " Queen Anne's War." During the interval of peace
the French had made a treaty with the Iroquois. A
Anne's War ^urtner Peaceful influence was the conversion of a large
1701-1713. ' portion of the Mohawks and their removal to the vicinity
of Montreal. Thus Vaudreuil, governor of Canada, was
able for several years to preserve friendship with this powerful con-
federacy, and in consequence the New York border did not suffer
in Queen Anne's War as formerly. It was otherwise with New
England. The Abenakis, who lived on this frontier, were under the
influence of the missionaries, and faithful to France. The governor
used them to harass the settlements, and their captives were turned
over to the missionaries for conversion to Catholicism.
Every portion of this frontier suffered, but the severest blow was
at Deerfield, February, 1704. Fifty Canadians and two hundred
De rfield Indians fell on the place on a bitterly cold night, scaled
Raided. tne Pansade before they could be discovered, and killed
the inhabitants from house to house. Fifty-three whites
perished during the night and one hundred and eleven were carried
away through the frozen forests, among them Rev. John Williams
and his family. Seventeen of the prisoners were killed on the march
because they could not keep up with their captors, and others died
of hunger. Mrs. Williams died in the former way, but the husband
and children reached Canada safely. After futile efforts to force him
to conversion he was purchased by the governor from his Indian
master, and in later years he and the survivors were ransomed by their
friends in New England. Many "New England Captives" refused
to return when the opportunity offered. Of this class was Eunice
Williams, daughter of the Deerfield minister. Converted to Ca-
tholicism and married to an Indian husband, she clung to her new
home and religion.
England was by this time convinced of the importance of taking
Canada, and made plans for a joint English and colonial expedition
for that purpose. In 1710 a fleet appeared in Boston,
Taken °y where it was joined by a body of colonial troops and suc-
ceeded in taking Port Royal, whose name was changed to
Annapolis. From that time Acadia was a British possession. In
1711 a still larger fleet appeared, commanded by Admiral Sir Hovenden
Walker. On board was an army under John Hill,
sfrHoven- brother of Queen Anne's favorite, Mrs. Masham. This
den Walker. f°rce> after receiving recruits in Boston, numbered
12,000 men, and should have taken Quebec with ease.
But the admiral would not trust his French pilots, and ran on
the rocks near the mouth of the St. Lawrence, with a loss of ten
COLONIAL RESULTS OF THE WAR 119
ships and 900 men. With this he lost heart and abandoned the
expedition.
In this war Spain was allied with France, and for that reason war be-
gan between her colonies and South Carolina. The initiative was with
the Spaniards of Florida, who in 1 702 armed a large number
of Indians for a hostile movement. Before they could
attack they were severely defeated by a body of Indians and Florida
raised by the South Carolinians, who then attacked
St. Augustine, burned the town, but failed to capture the fort held by
a Spanish garrison. Next year they raided the Florida plantations,
doing much damage. In 1706 the Spaniards retaliated with a large
French and Spanish fleet and a strong landing party sent out from
Havana to take Charleston. It met a stout resistance from Governor
Nathaniel Johnson and the colonial army. An attempt to land was
beaten back and the invading fleet was attacked so vigorously by a
flotilla of Carolina craft that it departed. A French man-of-war
which anchored in a neighboring bay was surrounded and taken.
In this spirited defense of their chief city the South Carolinians
showed great courage, and it is likely that with the aid of a
small English force they could have destroyed Spanish power
in Florida.
By this time England and France, with their allies, were tired of
the war, and peace was made at Utrecht, 1713. As to America, the
terms were : (i) England was to have Acadia, whose
boundaries, however, were not denned ; (2) the Iroquois
were acknowledged as English subjects, but their boun- 7I3
daries also were not defined; (3) Newfoundland was
ceded to England, but the French might dry fish on a part of the coast ;
and (4) the Hudson Bay region was to be English territory.
This was the first important treaty in which the affairs of
English America figured, and Professor Channing well says it
may be regarded as the beginning of the diplomatic history of
the United States.
Acadia now became the royal province of Nova Scotia. Its posses-
sion by the British meant much for the New England fisheries. The
Hudson Bay clause, also, had special significance. Fifty
years earlier Groseillier and Radisson, two Frenchmen
excluded from the fur trade by the system of monopolies company,
in existence in Canada, learned that the Canadian north-
west could be approached from the great bay of the north. After
futile efforts to get financial support in Boston and Paris, they got
help from a group of English nobles, among them Prince Rupert,
cousin of the king. The result was a charter for the Hudson Bay-
Company, 1670. Thus was founded the great commercial organi-
3ation which has worked so mightily to extend British influence in
the northern parts of the continent. It received its guarantee of
120 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
territorial development in the Treaty of Utrecht. Still another feature
of this treaty which was important to the colonies was the clause
known as the "Assiento," by which English merchants
" Assiento." nacl for tnirty Years tne monopoly of the slave trade in
Spanish America. Out of the firm development of
this trade English colonial slavery as well as colonial trade was to
get an added impetus.
To make good the loss of Port Royal, France now built a strong
fortress on Cape Breton Island, calling it Louisburg. This evident
determination to perpetuate her influence in that region
convinced the English authorities that further trouble
was to ^e exPected on the frontier. The expectation
1748. was realized when the War of the Austrian Succession
began in 1744. In this struggle England and France
were again on opposite sides, and hostilities at once began in America,
where the conflict is known as "King George's War." It was hardly
begun before Governor Shirley, of Massachusetts, and his associates
Louisbur wcre ^aym8 plans to take Louisburg. Indeed, they
could hardly do otherwise ; for the place harbored so many
privateers that New England fishermen and traders were reduced to
direst distress.
For this expedition New England raised 4000 men who sailed from
Boston on March 24, 1745, under the command of William Pepperell,
a rich merchant of Kittery, Maine. He found Louisburg
Taken Ufg insufficiently garrisoned and supplied, and a British
fleet arriving at that time in the Gulf of Newfoundland
served to keep French reinforcements from the beleaguered fort.
After forty days of siege Pepperell received the surrender of the
stronghold. The news of this colonial achievement caused an out-
break of surprise and joy in England, and for his part in it the com-
mander was made a baronet. In France it caused bewilderment
and dismay. Two expeditions were sent to retake Louisburg, but
the first, 1746, returned on account of storms and the death of the
commander, and the second, 1747, was driven back by a British
fleet. In 1746 Shirley organized a strong land expedition against
Canada, but it was disbanded by the English authorities, who needed
elsewhere the regulars Shirley expected to use. In 1748 the war
ended in the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. Louisburg
was unwisety restored to France, and an attempt was
made to soothe New England's disappointment by a
donation of money which partly repaid her expenses in the war.
WHO SHALL HAVE THE OHIO? 121
THE LAST CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ENGLISH AND THE FRENCH IN
NORTH AMERICA
No one who knew the conditions in America believed that the
Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle settled the differences between England
and France. In fact, every year brought the settlements
of the two powers closer together, and in doing so increased French and
the probability of war. A series of posts from the upper ^fJjJJl"
Mississippi to the lakes through the Wabash valley valley,
marked a continuous line of travel ; and in 1749, the year
after the treaty was signed, the governor of Canada sent Celoron
de Bienville with 214 white men and a force of Indians to take posses-
sion of the Ohio valley. In token of their pretensions they planted
leaden plates from Lake Chautauqua down the Alleghany and the
Ohio and up the Great Miami, including a portion of the undisputed
territory of the Iroquois. On the journey they met several bands
of English traders, whom they ordered out of the country. In the
same year several Virginians, among them Lawrence and Augustine
Washington, brothers of the future president of the republic, secured
a royal grant for 200,000 acres of land south of the Ohio and between
the Monongahela and Kanawha. About the same time a still
larger tract was secured by the Loyal Land Company to be located
beyond the mountains, probably in Tennessee or Kentucky. These
two movements, French and English, brought the two rival nations
into close proximity in a region which each regarded as the key to
the control of the interior. A clash could hardly be avoided.
If additional motive was necessary, it was to be found in Indian
relations in the lower part of the great valley. In the southern
Appalachians lived the Cherokees, a strong and progressive
nation. From the seventeenth century the Virginia
traders visited it, but with the settlement of Carolina
its rich trade was absorbed by the merchants of Charleston.
When Georgia was settled Augusta became a strong rival of Charleston.
This shifting of the Cherokee trade from place to place has nothing
to do with the conflict for the Mississippi valley, but it well shows
the progress of industrial distribution. In 1730 the English made
a treaty with the Cherokees, taking them under British protection.
South of them were the Creeks, another powerful nation, and west-
ward on the Mississippi the Chickasaws and Choctaws. With
these latter tribes the English had traded also, but the Spaniards
disputed with them the trade of the Creeks, and after the settlement
of Biloxi, New Orleans, and Mobile (1710) the French became com-
petitors for it. They made treaties with the three last-mentioned
nations, and what was the horror of the Englishmen to learn that
active efforts were being made to win the Cherokees. If France
122 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
could establish a firm influence over these western tribes, it was
clear she would be in a strong position to exclude any rival power
not only from the western trade but from pretensions at sovereignty
as well.
But let us return to events in the Ohio valley. Four years after
Bienville's journey, i.e. in 1753, Duquesne, the governor of Canada,
sent 1000 men to the same region. They constructed
of the (JhiS<>. a roac^ thirteen miles long from Presque Isle, now Erie,
to the Riviere aux Bceufs, tributary of the Allegheny,
where they built Fort Le Bceuf, and about forty miles southward
they built Fort Machault on the Allegheny. Whither this tended
was easy to see, and Governor Dinwiddie, of Virginia, sent a protest
by the hands of George Washington, a young man of twenty-one
years whose character had already won the confidence of all who
knew him. The region occupied, so said the protest, was in Virginia,
and the governor of Canada was told to vacate it. The commandant
at Fort de Bceuf forwarded the letter to Governor Duquesne, and
Washington returned by a most difficult journey to Virginia. On the
way he met a party going into the wilderness to build a trading fort
at the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, a critical
point which the French advance had not yet reached. They had
hardly accomplished their purpose when a large French force descended
the Allegheny in canoes, took the fort, and enlarged and strengthened
it, changing the name to Fort Duquesne. This happened in April,
1754-
At Will's Creek (Cumberland, Md.) the expelled English garrison
met Washington, now lieutenant colonel, whom Governor Dinwiddie
had sent forward with 300 men to strengthen the garrison
Successfuh at the forks of the Ohio- The task assiSned was beyond
his present strength, but Washington determined to go
forward and open and hold a road by which a larger party could drive
out the French. With great difficulty he cut a road across the moun-
tains, and came late in May to Great Meadows, fifty miles from
Will's Creek. Learning from friendly Indians that a French detach-
ment had marched to meet him, he surprised and defeated it, May 28.
The French explained afterwards that the detachment, whose leader,
Jumonville, was killed, merely came to warn the English out of the
country. The affair was followed by a movement in force against
the colonial army. Washington built a rude work, Fort Necessity,
and met the attack as well as he could, hoping to hold out until reen-
forcements arrived. His efforts were futile, and July 4 he sur-
rendered the place, marching out with the honors of war.
The war which was thus begun had been foreseen by the British
government, who in 1753 ordered the governors of certain colonies
to hold a conference with the Iroquois and devise a plan of com-
mon defense. Accordingly the Albany congress met June 19, 1754,
WAR INAUGURATED 123
with delegates present from New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland.
Washington was then facing defeat beyond the Allegha-
nies, and the congress took up the large phases of the
situation. To meet the crisis, united action was demanded,
and the meeting adopted a plan of union furnished by
Benjamin Franklin, one of the delegates, who, however, acted for a
committee appointed to consider the subject. It provided for a federal
council of delegates from each colony, to meet annually, and to have
among other federal powers the right to lay taxes, enact laws, raise
armies, appoint officials, and manage Indian affairs. In the general
state of colonial jealousy then existing it was impossible that the
colonies should accept a scheme which took from them so much of
their own authority. The plan was rejected by the assemblies, to
which it was referred, and it found little favor in England. Franklin
justly said it had too much self-government to please the king and
too much prerogative to please the assemblies.
Meanwhile, an elaborate attack on Canada was prepared in England,
although war with France was not yet declared. While a fleet under
Boscawen lurked around the mouth of the St. Lawrence
to intercept ships taking troops to Quebec, colonial The French
expeditions were to seize the frontier posts. Boscawen
allowed the prize to slip through his fingers, and of the
other attempts only that of Braddock demands our Orders,
attention. This brave but headstrong officer, with two
British regiments, arrived in the Potomac in March, 1755, and prepared
to move from Will's Creek on Fort Duquesne. He was joined by
450 Virginia militia under Washington, the entire army
being thus about 2000 strong. Widening and extending
Washington's road, his advance reached Turtle Creek,
eight miles from Duquesne, on July 9. As the troops marched
through an opening in the forest they encountered a heavy fire from
each side of the road. The Virginians leaped into the bushes and
fired from behind whatever cover they found. Braddock, coming
up, swore at them loudly, and when some of his regulars sought to
fight like the Virginians, he beat them back into the ranks. In close
formation in the middle of a glade they fired into the forest whence
came the enemy's fire, and in doing so killed some of the militia. On
the other hand, they made an excellent target for the foe, and fell
rapidly. Braddock rode everywhere with the greatest coolness, but
his efforts were unavailing, and when he finally received a mortal
wound he had just given the order to retreat. Washington, who had
been in the thickest of the fight, took command and led the men
to the rear. Of the 1200 men in the advance body 877 were killed
or wounded. The attacking party, led by Beaujeu, who was killed
in the fight, contained no more than 254 whites and 600 Indians,
I24 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
and the latter went home with their booty after the battle. At
Duquesne all was confusion, and the noo men still left in the English
army might have taken the place. But Dunbar, who now took com-
mand, fled to Philadelphia, burning his wagons and destroying a large
quantity of powder. This disaster was followed by Indian outrages,
Braddock's road making such operations easy to the savages.
While Braddock played his part in western Pennsylvania, fighting
also occurred in New York. William Johnson marched with about
3000 men to take the position at Crown Point, com-
New^York! manding the road from Lake George to Lake Champlain.
The French sent Dieskau with an equal force to oppose
him. At Lake George, September 8, the French advance attacked
a part of Johnson's force and was beaten off after a hot engagement.
Johnson gained much credit and was made a baronet for his part in
the battle, although he was wounded early in the day and the com-
mand was taken by Phineas Lyman, of Connecticut, a better soldier.
But Johnson's victory was the only success of the year, and the govern-
ment felt constrained to give it prominence. An expedition by which
Governor Shirley attempted to take Fort Niagara failed completely,
partly because Braddock's defeat prevented an expected cooperation,
and partly because it was impossible to bring up supplies to support
a large army on the western border of New York.
In the same year occurred the removal of the Acadians. The
governor of Nova Scotia was alarmed at their attitude, since they
insisted on being "neutrals" in the impending war and
refused to take an unconditional oath of allegiance to
England. He called on Governor Shirley, of Massachu-
setts, who sent 2000 volunteers, with whose aid Fort
Beausejour was taken. Then it was decided to remove the French
Acadians forcibly and distribute them among the colonies to the south-
ward. The decision was carried out with great suffering. Many
of the exiles escaped from their new homes, some going to Louisiana,
others to Canada, and others returning to Nova Scotia. The sad
tragedy has received its most popular rendering in Longfellow's
"Evangeline." The attitude of the Acadians toward the British
government was reprehensible, but not enough so to justify the
punishment they received.
In 1756 began the Seven Years' War in Europe, England joining
Prussia against France and Austria. This was two years after fighting
had begun in America, where the struggle is known as
BfCtghniSege the French and Indian War. The British ministry was
Years' War? led at nrst by Newcastle, who thought only of patronage
and peculation, and their conduct of the war was weak.
A new ministry created in 1756 could do little more, although
Pitt was in it in a secondary position. Finally there was such a
popular demand for this firm and patriotic leader that in 1757 he was
PITT'S VIGOROUS LEADERSHIP 125
given full control of the war policy, while Newcastle, one of the
Peljiams, maintained the control of home affairs. Frederick the Great
said, when he heard of the appointment: ''England has long been
in labor, and at last she has brought forth a man."
Meanwhile, the years 1756 and 1757 were full of misfortunes in
America, where Loudon, a weak product of the Pelham regime, com-
manded. In 1756 Oswego was taken, and in 1757 an
expedition against Louisburg failed, while a French army ]
under Montcalm took Fort William Henry at the 1757.*°
southern end of Lake George, and perhaps only the with-
drawal of his Indian allies saved from capture Fort Edward, on the
upper Hudson. Out of the discouragement consequent on these
events the colonies were raised by the news that Pitt was in full power,
and that arms, ammunition, and provisions would be furnished by the
king for any troops the colonies would raise. The response was ex-
cellent, and soon every colony north of the Potomac was filled with
busy preparations for war.
Four principal campaigns came out of this activity in America.
The first was against Louisburg, now greatly strengthened and de-
fended by 3000 regulars with twelve warships anchored in
the harbor. Before the place appeared in the summer of
1758 forty-one British men-of-war and 11,000 regulars
with a small force of provincials. Jeffrey Amherst was in command,
and one of his brigadiers was James Wolfe. In a severe bombardment
the French fleet was burned, the walls of the fort were pierced, and the
garrison was forced to surrender. In 1749 Halifax had been founded
as a seat of English power on the northern coast, and in view of its
development Louisburg ceased to be important. Lest it again fall
into enemy hands it was demolished in 1760.
The second campaign was made to take Fort Duquesne and relieve
Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia from Indian raids. The task
was assigned to General Forbes with 1200 Highlanders
and nearly 5000 militia from Pennsylvania, Maryland, ^rtuesne
Virginia, and North Carolina. The advance was slow, Taken,
partly because the commander was ill and partly because
he believed that the French Indians would become impatient and
desert the force at Duquesne. As winter approached he heard that
just this had happened. Hurrying forward with an advance guard
of 2500 he found the fort deserted and its works blown up, November
25, 1758. The French had fled. Three months earlier Colonel Brad-
street had destroyed Fort Frontenac, commanding Lake Ontario.
The fugitives from Forbes' vengeance were thus cut off from Canada
and dispersed into the wilderness. From these two blows col-
lapsed all that network of posts France established in the Ohio
valley, and those which were on or south of the western lakes were
left mostly to their own resources. The fort at the forks of the
126 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
Ohio was now named Fort Pitt, in honor of the minister who made
its capture possible.
The year 1758 thus saw the Canadian frontier defenses carried at
the two extremes, Louisburg and Duquesne. An attack made on
its center, along the Hudson-Lake-Champlain line of
b '^Failure aPProacn> was a failure. For the command Abercromby,
a political favorite, was selected against the wishes of
Pitt; but it was hoped that his inefficiency would be overbalanced
by his second in command, George Howe, as capable and popular a
soldier as then served the king. Abercromby gathered his forces,
15,000 strong, at Lake George, and July 4, 1758, advanced against
Ticonderoga. Next day an attempted ambuscade was beaten off,
but with the loss of Howe's life. From this time things went badly.
July 8, the British general fought a long and hard battle under the
walls of the fort, and at the end withdrew with a loss of 1944. He had
been repulsed by a force one fourth as large as his own, and yet he
fled rapidly to his boats. The demoralization of his army was only
relieved by Bradstreet's capture of Frontenac a few weeks later.
At this point let us consider affairs in Canada, where three men
were to mar or make the country's fortune. In 1756 the Marquis
de Montcalm, an excellent soldier and a cultured gentle-
man> arrived m Quebec with a commission to command
all the forces in Canada. His coming disappointed Vau-
dreuil, the governor, who did not relish a diminution of his own author-
ity. Over his head scowled the dark face of Bigot, intendant and
head of finances. Convinced that neither the irresolute governor nor
the brave general could save Canada from the British, he hastened
the course of his peculations in the conviction that the approaching
cataclysm would destroy the evidences of guilt. He seems to have
induced the governor to share the spoils, and the consequent corruption
in civil affairs was a source of embarrassment to the honest and pa-
triotic Montcalm. It cut off the supplies needed for the army, increased
the expenses of the war, and made it difficult to get recruits. All the
while the jealous governor did not cease to try to discredit the general
with the authorities at home. Montcalm, disgusted with the situation,
was on the point of resigning when Forts Duquesne and Frontenac were
lost and he then felt that honor demanded that he stay in Canada.
His army at the time it was largest consisted of 4000 French and
2500 Canadian regulars, with 5000 colonial militia. Besides these, all
able-bodied men in New France might be called into service when
needed. The Indian allies rarely mustered more than 1000.
In 1759 Pitt sent out two strong expeditions. Wolfe,
Planned*:? *r W^ 9°°° m6n an(^ a Power^u^ neet was to attack Quebec
I7Sg by the St. Lawrence, and Amherst, with 11,000, was to
move on the same place by way of Lake Champlain.
Supporting Amherst, 5000 men under Colonel Prideaux were sent
QUEBEC TAKEN 127
against Fort Niagara. This post was easily taken, and Oswego was
rebuilt, reestablishing complete English control of Lake Ontario.
Amherst's expedition reached Lake George in June, whereupon the
French abandoned Ticonderoga and Crown Point. Following their
, retreat northward he found them strongly placed at Isle aux Noix, com-
manding the entrance of the Richelieu, and was not able to take the
position on account of the approach of winter. On Wolfe, therefore,
fell the burden of the attack on Quebec. For that work his army was
designed to be strong enough for complete success even if it acted inde-
pendently. France, now engaged on every side in Europe, had no
troops available for Canada. Montcalm, harassed by enemies at his
own side, was forced to prepare for the impending conflict with no
other outside assistance than 500 fresh troops and a small supply
of provisions. Advised of the coming of Wolfe, he gathered at Quebec
all the men available, 15,000 white men and 1000 Indians, and held
himself ready for the onslaught.
The British expedition was before Quebec by June 26. Before him
Wolfe saw a rocky peninsula, at the end of which was the town. The
crest of the bluff was well fortified, and across the neck of
land above the town a strong line of intrenchments was
drawn. To assault the place from the water front or in
the rear seemed futile. In fact, it was a prevalent opin-
ion that Quebec was impregnable, and to starve it into submission was
difficult, because winter operations were impossible. Wolfe realized
these disadvantages, but landed his many cannon on points of vantage
and opened a bombardment. At the end of two months the buildings
in the town had been badly damaged, but the French hold was
not relaxed. The delay, however, discouraged the provincial troops,
many of whom went home. The approach of winter warned the
British that they must complete their work or withdraw, and Wolfe
decided to attack the town from the high ground behind it. On the
night of September 12, he managed to find a way to the
Plains of Abraham, a mile and a half from Quebec, and by
the morning of the i3th 4500 troops were drawn up ready
to assault the defenses. Montcalm hurried forward with a force of
about equal size. Thinking only a small portion of Wolfe's men con-
fronted him, he drew up his troops in line of battle in order to drive
the British into the river. Had he retired into his own lines he might
have held out until the November frosts forced the British to with-
draw. The battle that followed was hard volley against hard volley,
and lasted only a few minutes. Some of the Frenchmen were recruits
whose wavering threw the rest into confusion, and then the whole line
broke for the cover of the fortifications, followed by the English, whose
energy made the pursuit a complete victory. At the moment the flight
began, both Wolfe and Montcalm fell, mortally wounded. Governor
Vaudreuil, in consternation, withdrew hastily to Montreal, and four
128 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
days later, September 17, the garrison he left behind surrendered to
the British.
When winter began, Quebec was occupied by 7000 British troops
under General Murray, illy prepared to face the bitter cold. Hardship
and illness reduced this force by the end of April to 3000
Held*6* effectives. Down on them now came Levis, the successor
of Montcalm, who had collected the fragments of French
military power to the number of 12,000. April 28 Murray gave battle
on the Plains of Abraham and was forced back into his lines with a loss
of a third of his force engaged. His position seemed desperate when
the arrival of British frigates with supplies restored hope and enabled
him to drive off Levis, who now gave his attention to the defense of
Montreal, the last French stronghold in Canada.
His utmost efforts in this respect were soon demanded, for three
expeditions were being prepared to overwhelm him. One under
Amherst was to assemble at Oswego and proceed down
Montreal La^e Ontario and the St. Lawrence, another under Havi-
i760en> land was to advance by way of Lake Champlain, and a
third was to be led by Murray up the St. Lawrence from
Quebec. The three expeditions were to arrive at Montreal at the
same time, and if the plans did not miscarry could be expected to put
an end to French rule in New France. The story of American opera-
tions against Canada is full of the failure of cooperation where support-
ing movements had been proposed, but for once we come to the ex-
ception. August 24, 1 760, Murray was eighteen miles below Montreal,
and took such a strong position that he was safe against an attack in
detail. September 6 both Haviland and Amherst arrived before the
town, and with the aid of Murray's ships the investment was completed.
The defenses, good enough against the Indians, were not proof against
British cannon; the garrison was only 2500 men, for many of the
Canadians had gone home on being promised immunity by the British ;
and the provisions would suffice for only fifteen days. Under these
conditions the French hastened the inevitable by surrendering the
place and giving parole not to fight again during the war. Thus was
lowered the French flag in Canada September 8, 1760. It is gratifying
to add that in Paris, whither they were allowed to go, Vaudreuil,
Bigot, and their chief tools were arrested and tried for malfeasance in
office. The governor was acquitted for lack of proof, but the false
intendant was fined 1,500,000 francs, his ill-gotten pelf confiscated,
and he himself exiled for life.
The struggle thus far had not affected Louisiana, but it
now remains to be seen how that too was drawn into the
the War. vortex of ruin which affected all French colonies. Spain
saw with alarm the progress of British power in America
and on the sea, and in 1761 pledged herself in the celebrated Family
Compact to treat French enemies as her own enemies. As a consequence,
THE TREATY OF PARIS 129
England declared war on her January 4, 1762, and sent a strong expedi-
tion against Cuba. August 13 Havana was taken with booty worth
$15,000,000; a sum which, however, did not repay the frightful loss
of lives from disease in the British army. September i of this year a
British force took the Philippine Islands, but gave them up when
promised a ransom. Impressed by these experiences, Spain was soon
willing to make peace. France, utterly exhausted, was equally ready,
and the result was the Treaty of Paris, February 10, 1763.
Before it was signed there was much discussion of terms. England
boldly demanded Florida, much to the dismay of Spain, who wished to
keep the entrance of the Gulf. Then France, out of con-
sideration for Spain, whom she had persuaded to enter the p^*7 of
war, offered England all of Louisiana west of .the Missis- XJJ^'
sippi if she would forego the demand for Florida. But Eng-
land was obdurate ; and France gave Louisiana to Spain to recoup her
for the loss of the peninsular province. The arrangement was made
secretly between the. two powers concerned, and was not generally
known until long after the Treaty of Paris was signed. France had
been spending on Louisiana 300,000 livres a year without a sou in
return, and her apparent generosity accorded well with her financial
necessities. With Canada and India gone, and her fleet destroyed,
Louisiana could not be of value to her.
The terms of the general treaty were as follows: Canada, Nova
Scotia, Cape Breton, and all the interior east of the Mississippi, ex-
cept the so-called Isle d'Orleans near its mouth, were
ceded to the British ; the West Indian islands of Tobago,
Dominica, Granada, and St. Vincent also were ceded to
the English, but Martinique and Guadeloupe, which had been con-
quered, were left to France. England received Florida and gave up
Cuba ; France lost all her East Indian colonies but Pondicherry and
Chandernagore ; and France was to retain the right to dry fish on the
north and west coasts of Newfoundland, with two small islands off the
shore as a shelter for her fishermen.
Thus France made her exit from North America, where she had lost
her day as a colonizing power. One cannot but admire the bravery
with which she attempted large tasks and the generosity
with which she succored infant settlements. Her failure
was inherent in her own life. Without a large manufactur-
ing interest she was not able to build up a colonial market for her mer-
chandise ; and without a surplus population there was little demand
for colonies to improve the condition of her farming class. As Spain
tried to support colonial development on the mining industry so France
wished to make it depend on the fur trade, whose very existence
demanded that agriculture should not advance into the continent.
Between the farmsteads of the English" and the hunting ranges of the
interior the clash was inevitable and the issue certain. If Pitt had
130 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
not, by his foresight and energy, completed the French expulsion in
1760, the colonies themselves must have done it at no very distant date.
It is said, but on doubtful authority, that Choiseul, the French
minister who made the Treaty of Paris, remarked that England would
do well to leave Canada to France in order that the danger
E^Vh6 °^ a ^rencn anc^ Incuan attack might keep the English
Course colonies dependent on the mother country. It is certain
Wise? that the idea was often mentioned in 1762. It was so
strongly urged by the English interests in the West Indies
in order to induce the government to retain all the French islands
there, that Franklin wrote a pamphlet to show that it was badly
founded. The colonies, he said, were so divided by mutual distrust
and varying interests that they would never unite against England.
Such might have been the case for many years had not a headstrong
king forced them to a union in defense of rights they held dearer than
any of the interests which had caused their dissensions.
Two Indian wars came as an aftermath of. the struggle against
France. After the outbreaks of 171 1-1716, the Cherokees remained at
peace with the English ; but the efforts of the French had
The Ckero- due influence in arousing their suspicions. A party went
iLostititi&B. rather unwillingly with Forbes against Fort Duquesne,
1759, and some of them deserted. A group of the deserters
on their return killed twenty-two whites in North Carolina,
and another band stole a number of horses. The whites retaliated
by killing the Indians, whereupon the Indians fell on the settlements
and slew whom they found. Governor Lyttleton of South Carolina
now called out troops and marched to. the Indian country with 1500
poorly equipped soldiers. Before he started he was joined by thirty
Cherokee chiefs who said they were come to make peace. They had
been promised personal immunity, but Lyttleton forced them to go
with him to the frontier, and when the murderers of the whites were
not delivered up by the tribes, he detained as hostages these envoys
of peace, who had trusted his promise. Although he made a new treaty,
he was hardly back in Charleston before depredations were resumed.
The commandant of the frontier fort in which the hostages were de-
tained was lured out of the gate on pretense of a parley and murdered,
and the garrison, angered by this cruelty, slew the hostages.
The war now became general. Lyttleton was no longer governor,
but Bull, acting in his place, sent forward, 1760, Colonel Montgomery
with 1650 men, three-fourths of whom were regulars who
The Cam- na(j opportunely arrived at Charleston. They burned the
i^Tand lower Cherokee towns and killed or captured more than a
1761. n hundred persons, but were fiercely engaged in an attempt to
cross the mountains and fall back to the seaboard, whence
the regulars returned to New York to take part in the campaign
against Montreal. Their departure encouraged the Indians and sealed
TWO INDIAN WARS 131
the fate of Fort London. The post had been unwisely built in an ex-
posed position beyond the Alleghanies, and its garrison of 200 men
could not be relieved. Hunger at last overcame them and they sur-
rendered on condition that they should return home in safety. But
the Indians pursued them, slew twenty-six, and took the others pris-
oners. By 1761 troops could be spared from the north, and General
Amherst sent Colonel Grant with 1200 Highlanders to complete the
pacification of the Indian country. Grant, joined by militia and
friendly Indians until his army numbered 2600, won a costly victory
over the Cherokees in June, and then proceeded to destroy their towns
and the growing crops. This was a heavy blow, and the chiefs sued for
peace. The treaty that followed did not remove Cherokee resent-
ment, as their support of the British showed in the war of the Revolu-
tion. In the war of 1760 and 1761 both North Carolina and Virginia
raised troops to protect their borders ; but the work of vengeance
which forced the Cherokees to make peace was done by the regulars,
marching from Charleston and aided by the South Carolina militia.
The second conflict with the Indians was the Pontiac War. The
Indians of the Northwest recognized their doom when the British
seized and held the French posts, and to save themselves
formed a confederacy under Pontiac, a capable and am- ^J^C6 _
bitious warrior of the Ottowas. Emissaries of France told I764.17 3
them that the French would return and subdue the British
garrisons, and this gave the red men courage to strike while the new
lords of the country were weak. The confederacy was well organized,
each tribe promising to fall on and destroy the post nearest to it.
The attack was made in May, 1763, and the result was that ten posts
from Bedford, Pennsylvania, to Michilimackinac, at the entrance of
Lake Michigan, fell to the savages, most of them being entered through
treachery, and the garrisons murdered. Detroit and Fort Pitt, however,
were warned and held out. The former received supplies
by water and defied its foe, though Pontiac himself led
the force which invested its land approaches. The latter
was saved by Colonel Bouquet. This officer had seen seven years'
service against the Indians and knew well how to fight them. He
was in Philadelphia when the trouble began, and was ordered to re-
lieve Fort Pitt with 500 Highlanders. Moving rapidly, he approached
the scene of Braddock's defeat on August 5. Here he was surrounded
by Indians at Busby Run, and fought fiercely until nightfall. Next
morning the Indians resumed the battle, when by a feigned retreat
Bouquet drew them into a heedless charge on his bag-
gage train, and turning at the proper moment drove them J^War. °
off in great disorder. Four days later Fort Pitt was
reached and relieved, but Bouquet must wait for reinforcements
before he could march into the Indian country beyond it. In the
following year, with 1500 men, he marched without opposition into
i32 COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT
what is now southeastern Ohio as far as the upper Muskingum and
made treaties of peace with the Indians of that region, rescuing 200
captured settlers. In a great council at Fort Niagara the Indians of
the lake also made a treaty of peace in which they ceded to the
English a strip four miles wide on each side of the Niagara river.
Pontiac remained hostile until convinced that there was no hope of
aid from the French, and in 1766 he, with other recalcitrants, made
an unwilling submission at Oswego. Three years later he was slain in
the forest near St. Louis by another Indian to whom an English trader
had promised a barrel of rum. He was one of the ablest and most
patriotic men of his race.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Bancroft, History of the United States, 10 vols. (1834-1874), and Hildreth,
History of the United States, 6 vols. (1849-1852), the older standard works on
the colonial period and still important; but better and fresher are the volumes in
The American Nation (A. B. Hart, Editor). On the period described in this chapter
the volumes are Greene, Provincial America (1905), and Thwaites, France in
America (1905). Channing, History of the United States, vol. II (1908), is excel-
lent, and great praise must be awarded to Avery, History of the United States and
its People, 7 vols. (1904-). Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America,
8 vols. (1888-1889), has some very good chapters and very valuable references.
Chalmers, Introduction to the History of the Revolt of the American Colonies, vol. I
(1782). Vol. II (1845), a British work of much ability and generally regarded
as the best contemporary general history of the colonies. The author was a king's
officer in America, and after his return to England had access to important papers.
Lodge, Short History of the English Colonies (ed. 1902) is a useful summary.
The State Paper Office, London, contains in manuscript a vast collection of
letters from British Colonial officials, the most important source of our colonial
history. Some of the states have published all or parts of this material, notably
New York in Documents Relative to Colonial History, 14 vols. and index (1856-
1883); New Jersey, in Documents Relating to Colonial History, 22 vols. (1880-
1902); North Carolina in Colonial Records, 10 vols. (1886-1890). The British
government is slowly publishing calendars with the title, Calendars of State Papers,
Colonial Series: America and West Indies, 14 vols. (1860-1910). See also
Force, Tracts and Other Papers, 4 vols. (1836-1846).
For English history and policy during this period see : Lecky, England in the
Eighteenth Century, 8 vols. (1878-1890), a judicious discussion; Cobbett, Parlia-
mentary History of England, 36 vols. (1806-1820) ; Egerton, Short History of British
Colonial Policy (1897) ; Beer, Commercial Policy of England towards the American
Colonies (Columbia University Studies, III, 1893) ; Ibid., The Old Colonial System,
1660-1754, 2 vols. (1912) ; Ibid., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765 (1907) ; Kellog,
The American Colonial Charter (Am. Hist. Assn. Report, 1903, vol. I); and Lord,
Industrial Experiments in the British Colonies of North America (Johns Hopkins
Univ. Studies, Extra, 1898).
For the development of institutions within the colonies the best work is Osgood,
The American Colonies in the Seventeenth Century, 3 vols. (1904-1907). Good
monographs are : Greene, The Provincial Governor in the English Colonies of North
America (Harvard Hist. Studies, 1898) ; McKinley, Suffrage in the Thirteen English
Colonies (Univ. of Penn. Publications, series in History, 1905) ; and Miller, Legal
Qualifications for Office (Am. Hist. Assn. Report, 1899).
For the history of individual colonies the following are convienent and generally
reliable : Palfrey, History of New England, 6 vols. (ed. 1890) ; Belknap, History of
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
133
New Hampshire, 3 vols. (1784-1702); Barry, History of Massachusetts, 3 vols.
(1858-1864) ; Arnold, History of Rhode Island, 2 vols. (ed. 1899) 5 Trumbull,
History of Connecticut, 2 vols. (ed. 1898) ; Fiske, Dutch and Quaker Colonies, 2 vols.
(1899) ; Smith, History of New York (1757 and various later editions) ; Brodhead,
History of New York, 2 vols. (1871) ; Mereness, Maryland as a Proprietary Province
(1901); Fiske, Old Virginia and Her Neighbors, 2 vols. (1898); Campbell, History
of Virginia (1860) ; Ashe, History of North Carolina, vol. I (1908) ; McCrady,
South Carolina under Proprietary Government (1897) ; Ibid., South Carolina under
Royal Government (1899) ; and Jones, History of Georgia, 2 vols. (1883).
On the French in Canada and their conflict with England the best American
work is Parkman's standard series, France and England in the New World, 12 vols.,
in many editions. The sub-titles are : Pioneers of France in the New World (1865) ;
Jesuits in North America (1867) ; La Salle (1869) ; The Old Regime in Canada
(1874); Frontenac and New France under Louis XIV. (1877); A Half-Century
of Conflict, 2 vols. (1892); Montcalm and Wolfe, 2 vols. (1884); and The Con-
spiracy of Pontiac, 2 vols. (1851). Kingsford, History of Canada, 10 vols. (1887-
1898), is the best English authority. It lacks Parkman's readable qualities, but is
more concise. Corbett, England in the Seven Years' War, 2 vols. (1907), is excellent ;
Miles, History of Canada under the French Regime (1872), is a good short work, and
Winsor, From Cartier to Frontenac (1894), is valuable for its treatment of explora-
tions. The French side of the war is presented in Faillon, Histoire de la Colonie
Franqaise en Canada, 3 vols. (1865) ; Ferland, Cours d'histoire du Canada, 2 vols.
(1861-1865); and Garneau, Histoire du Canada, 4 vols. (ed. 1882-1883). For
the last struggle for Canada see : Wood, The Fight for Canada (1906) ; Bonnechose,
Montcalm et la Canada Franqaise (1877); Martin, Montcalm et les Dernieres
Annies de la Colonie Franqaise (ed. 1898).
For early Louisiana see: Gayarre, Louisiana under French Dominion, 4 vols.
(ed. 1904) ; Fortier, History of Louisiana, 6 vols. (1904) ; and Villiers du Terraget,
Les Dernieres Annies de la Louisiane Franqaise (1903).
For Independent Reading
Fiske, Old Virginia and Her Neighbors, 2 vols. (1898) ; Madam Knight, Journal,
1704-1705 (ed. 1865), relates chiefly to New England; Byrd, Writings of Colonel
William Byrd of Westover in Virginia, Esq. (Bassett ed., 1901) ; Parkman, La Salle
(1869) ; Ibid., Montcalm and Wolfe, 2 vols. (1884) ; Wright, Life of Wolfe (1864) ;
Guenin, Montcalm (1898) ; Halsey, The Old New York Frontier, 2 vols. (1882) ;
Grace King, New Orleans (1895).
CHAPTER VII
SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
THE CONDITIONS OF SETTLEMENT
THE desire to own land was the impelling cause of most of the early
migration to America. Land was sold cheap, but the amount one
person might buy was sometimes restricted. Free dis-
tribution to settlers was usually made. Such allotments,
tion or tne ,, . . . , ,, . •'. . .
Land. importation rights, were as large in some colonies as
fifty acres for each adult brought in, and they were allowed
to male indented servants at the expiration of term of service. In the
South, where money crops could be raised, the tendency was to own
large farms ; for though the men of a community were usually poor at
first, some would be thrifty and would eventually buy up and con-
solidate into large holdings what had originally been a series of small
farms. In New England agriculture was not as profitable as in the
South, the soil was stony, the crops were not abundant, and the
farms were small. Where the farms were large, population was widely
dispersed, and where they were small it was denser.
In all the colonies the settlers first took up the richest land, gener-
ally along the rivers. This was advantageous because the rivers were
Roads ^e kest means °f transportation. In the southern col-
onies, in which streams abounded, the land between them
came slowly into settlement. This "ridge land" was the home of the
poorer people, and the result was that roads came slowly into existence.
When constructed, they were merely traced through the forest and
became very difficult in wet weather. In the compact settlements of
the North roads were early laid out, bridges were built, and inns were
provided. But land traveling was not comfortable before the revolu-
tion in any part of the colonies.
In the royal colony land was granted by the governor and council
in the name of the king, in a proprietary colony it was granted either
directly or indirectly by the officers exercising a similar jur-
EiTiand* isdiction. In New England the assembly created trustees
Town.n °f a town with authority to grant the land to settlers. The
trustees then met and selected the site for the meeting-
house, reserving a portion of the land for a common, and assigning the
lots around it. Land not granted was held by the town for common
use, as grazing, the taking of firewood, and wood for necessary build-
ings. From the compact nature of New England settlements the
134
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
towns were relatively small, from ten to fifteen miles across, and most
of the settlers were located conveniently near the meetinghouses.
When the danger of Indian wars passed and the inhabitants became
numerous at the " center" of the town, they began to form outlying
villages on the better land in other parts of the town. Sometimes they
moved to the frontier and established another town with the con-
sent of the assembly.
The county was the unit of organization in the South. It was from
four to ten times as large as the New England town. The frontier
county was usually a vast area with only a fringe of settle-
ment on the edge nearest the older settlements. When gjj^
this fringe thickened a new county was set off still nearer county™
to the frontier. The county was created by the assembly.
As the colony grew in wealth, the oldest counties were more conserva-
tive than the newer ones and were unwilling to create the latter as
rapidly as the growth of population seemed to demand, lest the control
of the assembly pass into the hands of "back counties." The early
counties were relatively small, and they took pains to have the newer
ones very large. As representation was not in proportion to popula-
tion, the older counties were thus able to keep a large influence in the
assemblies. This led to bitter conflicts. As the people of the newer
counties were, from Pennsylvania southward, largely of Scotch-Irish
stock and poor men, the contest often took the shape of a democracy
against an aristocracy. In North Carolina the controversy between
the counties was peculiarly bitter, because those in the Albemarle
region, the oldest in the province, had five representatives each, while
the new ones had only two. The old counties thus had an overweening
influence in the assembly, which the governor sought to break down.
He finally called the assembly to meet on the Cape Fear, so remote
from the Albemarle region that not all of the large delegation from the
old counties could attend. The result was that all the Albemarle
delegates refused to attend, disputed on the ground of no quorum
the legality of the laws passed without them, and refused to pay taxes
levied as well as to recognize the legality of a new law apportioning
representation. So unpleasant a situation was created that for eight
years the wheels of government were nearly at a standstill. Ulti-
mately there was a compromise by which the older counties retained
their disproportionate representation and a number of new counties
were created.
By 1760 the opposition between new and old settlements had taken
on a territorial character. In Massachusetts, as well as in Virginia
and the Carolinas, the wealthy men lived on the coast.
As men of education and conservative business instinct, an^h"theb'"
they were at odds with the small farmers of the interior Aristocrats."
over many questions. They called the popular party
"the mob" and its leaders "demagogues," while the popular party
i36 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
called them "aristocrats" and oppressors of the poor. When the
revolution was coming to the explosion point, the latter class held back
a long time and many of them ultimately repudiated a movement in
which were so many of the "demagogues." It must not be forgotten
that each side gave an important impulse to our development. One
was a conservative force and checked the dangers which came from
inexperienced leaders: the other incited to liberty and political
equality and checked the tendency of society to settle down into an
aristocracy of wealth. This tendency of the newer communities
towards democracy has continued throughout our history, steadily
following the frontier westward.
When an individual had a right to a grant of land, that is, a warrant,
he sought a surveyor, a public officer, who ran the bounds of the grant
from any ungranted lands open to settlement. The sur-
vey ™^ t^ie warrant was returned to the proper officer,
in most cases the secretary of the colony, who made a deed
which when signed by the governor constituted a legal title. For the
warrant, survey, and deed fees were paid ; and they constituted a large
part of the remuneration of the officers concerned. There were many
complaints, especially in the royal provinces, that the fees were ex-
orbitant. In all but trading and fishing communities land specula-
tion was the favorite means of making money. The surveyor, who
from his travels into all parts of the forest had opportunity to find
the best tracts of ungranted land, was much concerned in the opera-
tion, either buying outright and selling later when the advance of
population had raised the price, or becoming the agent of some rich
man who could make the investment. Many of the great fortunes of
the colonies at the beginning of the revolution were derived from land
speculation. This was particularly true in the southern colonies,
into which immigrants moved rapidly from 1730 to 1775. The
shrewd men who bought the frontier land in the early part of this
period reaped handsome profits from their ventures.
In 1760 the total population of the colonies was 1,596,000, of which
New England had 473,000, the middle colonies 405,000, and the South,
including Maryland, 718,000. Virginia was the largest
colony, with 315,000 inhabitants, and Georgia was the
smallest, with 9000. At that time slavery existed every-
where, but in the colonies north of Maryland it had only 10 per cent
of the population, while in the others it had 41 per cent. North
Carolina alone of the southern colonies had not yielded largely to
this form of labor, the slaves being here only 17 per cent of the popu-
lation, while in South Carolina they were 70 per cent, and in Virginia
47 per cent.
Most of the immigrants to America, both before and after the
revolution, were poor people seeking to improve their fortunes. In
all the colonies were exceptions to this statement. There were per-
THE LABORERS
137
sons who came as officials, or ministers in early New England, and
in Virginia were a number of gentlemen adventurers in the Cromwellian
days, and always a few superior men to whom the charm
of the wilderness was strong ; but all these together were J108*
a small part of the population. And yet this part had Poor People
an influence larger than its size would seem to warrant.
It contributed the social ideals of a new community. The educated
clergy and other leaders of early New England were the models for
later clergymen and leading men of colonial birth. The early gentle-
men adventurers of Virginia, Maryland, and South Carolina were the
men whom the colonials who became rich sought to imitate. Thus the
aim of the South became to found estates like those of the lower
English gentry and to reproduce their manners, their sports, and their
intellectual life. In New England, sports, manners, and intellectual
life had the serious cast of the early Puritans. In every royal colony
the governor and other officers sent over from England were very in-
fluential in all social matters. The history of American society re-
veals the evolution of a healthy, earnest, and teachable democracy,
forming its social ideals by those of Europe, and seeking to reject
what was bad in the old and to improve in its own way that which it
had inherited from its own past.
LABORING CLASSES
In the beginning the colonists had white laborers, persons who ar-
rived with their masters under contract to work for stipulated periods.
But when the settlers needed more servants it was diffi-
cult to get them in the colony, where any industrious
freeman could easily become a proprietor. Orders were
accordingly sent to agents in England to send over servants, the
employer paying the commission of the agent who secured the servant
and the passage money demanded by the ship captain who brought
him over. Under these conditions the supply was small, while the
demand was ever greater. Colony products were bulky and many
ships sailed to America in ballast, and their captains were eager to
get cargoes wherever possible. The agents who collected servants
were urged to furnish servants and no questions asked about those
they produced. Thus grew up the practice of kidnapping, or "spirit-
ing" children, or even adults. They were enticed on Kidna ^
board a short time before the ship sailed and were soon
beyond the reach of effective protest. Arrived in the colony, the
captain delivered the cargo to the planters who paid most. If such
a servant was a minor, he was apprenticed to the master who paid his
passage under forms prescribed by law. Many instances of hardship
occurred in the English ports ; for the kidnappers were of the lowest
class of criminals and stood on little ceremony in selecting their vie-
138 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
tims ; but most of those whom they sent to America were the children
of the laboring class, whose condition in the colony was probably
better than that of their parents. After such an apprentice completed
his term of service, he was a free man, and in most colonies received a
grant of land. In many a community was a man of mark who had
come to America in this way.
The free servants who could not pay their passage had the habit of
contracting to serve for a term of years the captain who took them to
America, and he would transfer the contract to a planter
Indented^ ^or monev- This c^ass made up most of the indented serv-
Servants. ants- Colonial law fixed the period for which they could
be required to serve, usually from three to five years, pro-
vided that the master must furnish proper food and clothing and that
the servants should each receive a small tract of land when the term
of service expired. In some colonies persons who had thus served out
their time were called "redemptioners." A third source of labor for
the colonies was convicts and "sturdy vagabonds," whom
the English authorities sent abroad to be rid of the burden
°f supporting them. Virginia passed many laws to forbid
these importations, but the king vetoed them. Maryland
seems to have had little objection to them. Industrial conditions in
New England did not favor a large servant class. Neighbors fre-
quently hired themselves to neighbors, or even bound out their chil-
dren to learn trades, but doing so did not imply a loss of social esteem
on the part of the servants. In the colonies in which large plantations
were the rule this was otherwise. To be a servant was to belong to a
lower social rank than the master, and it was difficult for time and
success to remove the stigma. The liberated servant in this part of
the country found his refuge in the frontier, where he settled among
persons as lowly born as himself and where his future rank was de-
termined by his own exertions.
The three classes named did not furnish sufficient labor for the
tobacco and rice growers of the South. Here were two crops for
which the world was willing to pay liberally and capable,
as the producers thought, of extensive production. On
the other hand, everywhere was an abundance of cheap land. Noth-
ing was wanting but labor. The white servants were hard to obtain
and rarely served longer than the term of the indenture, so that they
must continually be replaced by new ones, who in turn would be
away to the frontier in four or five years. Under these conditions
negro slaves, already largely used in the Spanish colonies, began to
be employed. The first African slaves in America arrived in Virginia
in 1619, but they were not satisfactory laborers. They were intract-
able and unacquainted with the labor requirements of a civilized com-
munity. To control them and get them to labor profitably was
difficult, and most planters objected to it. The number in the colony
SLAVERY IN THE COLONIES
139
grew so slowly that in 1700 it was only 6000. By this time it was ob-
served that "new negroes," those recently imported from Africa,
worked very well if distributed among colony-born negroes ; and this
reconciled the planters to the use of this form of labor. The wide
expansion of tobacco culture fixed the practice of slavery in Maryland
and Virginia. The early South Carolinians were chiefly from Barba-
dos, where slavery had already gone through its experimental stage,
and they had this kind of labor from the beginning. Slavery existed
in the North as well as in the South ; for there was at this time very
little public opinion against it. But it was not profitable on the small
farms of the North, and in this region the slaves were chiefly in the
towns as domestic servants or laborers. In 1 760 there were only 87,000
blacks north of Maryland to 299,000 in the other colonies.
When England began to have colonies, her law had no provision for
slavery. In fact, the institution had nearly died out in later Roman
times, and from that period the impression prevailed in Europe that
no Christian could be enslaved. Negro slavery existed in Morocco,
and when the Spaniards found that Indian slaves suc-
cumbed before the hard work in the American mines Slavery, the
they introduced it into their colonies. The African has
accepted bondage more readily than any other race. The
Spaniards found him a satisfactory slave, and their example was fol-
lowed in the British and French West Indies. In this part of America,
therefore, slavery was formed after the ancient model, and the absolute
dominion of the master over his slave was generally recognized. In
the continental colonies this was not at first the case.
Here early slavery was a kind of continuous indented TypeEnghsh
service, the master being required to give his slave proper
food and care. But slowly a code of laws evolved which recognized
slavery and gave it a legal status.
The settlement of South Carolina chiefly by men of Barbados in-
troduced the West Indian type of slavery on the continent ; and the
success which followed undoubtedly stimulated the spread
of slavery in the tobacco colonies. In 1739, when the slave Code*1
number of slaves in South Carolina largely exceeded that
of the whites, there was a serious slave outbreak. One result was a
revision of the slave code in the colony, and this example was followed
in other colonies. Out of these codes one may gather the following
general features. All negroes or persons of mixed negro blood were
slaves whose mothers were slaves. They could be punished by their
masters, and if one died from chastisement where malice was not
evident the slayer was not punished. But maliciously killing a slave
was forbidden. For serious offenses, as murder, arson, theft, and
maiming, the slave was not punished by the master, but he was tried
by a court of two or three justices and several freeholders, who took
such evidence as they saw fit, and, sitting as a jury but without form of
140 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
law, gave the verdict. For minor offences the usual punishment was
thirty-nine lashes. A negro could not testify against a white person,
the assumption being that all negroes, bond or free, were hostile to the
whites and unreliable witnesses, either from prejudice or from mental
incapacity to observe accurately. Slaves were not allowed to go about
without written permission, they might not have firearms, and restric-
tions were placed on their trading and their meeting together. At
this time the fear of slave insurrections was as great as later, and it
was provided that conspiracy against the whites should be punished
by death. If a negro showed violence to a white person, he might be
whipped, or even killed if the case were aggravated. The slave codes
of this epoch remained in force with slight modification until the
general revision which followed the inauguration of the abolition move-
ment in 1831.
The slave code was made to meet a peculiar condition. If men of
a lower stage of civilization were brought into the colonies, they must
not, it was held, be admitted to the same privileges as the whites.
That this was the opinion of all parts of the country is shown by the
regulations enforced in all parts of the North where there were many
negroes. Boston, the ports in Rhode Island and Connecticut, Phila-
delphia, the town of New York and the great plantations along the
Hudson held most of the slaves in the North. In all these places
restrictions were imposed on the slave's right to go about at night,
and his right to traffic and to have arms ; he was tried by special tri-
bunals, and freely whipped by his master.
COLONIAL INDUSTRY
Agriculture was the most extensive industry. Every colony pro-
duced its own food in normal times, and most of them had some for
export. The sugar islands, foreign as well as British, offered
Agriculture a gOO(^ market for such supplies, for they found it most
Lumber. profitable to devote themselves exclusively to their one
staple. To them the middle colonies sent great quantities
of flour, pork, and beef, and New England sent potatoes, vegetables,
and fish. From Virginia, Maryland, and North Carolina went out
tobacco for the world, and from South Carolina rice and indigo. The
Carolinas also exported tar, pitch, and turpentine. Lumber, either
as sawed timber or as boards and staves, was exported from all the
colonies. The masts which came from the New England forests were
famous in western Europe.
Manufacturing in the modern sense was unknown in
factures ^e c°l°nies> but it must be remembered that the factory
system had not yet developed in Europe. In England
weavers, shoemakers, and other handworkers lived in villages and fol-
lowed their trades solely. In the North most of the farmers knew some
trade which they followed when they could not work on the farms.
MANUFACTURES AND FISHERIES
141
Thus the coarser grades of cloth, hats, shoes, joiner's work, tools,
and nails were made in the colonies. In the South each large plan-
tation had its artisans, many of them slaves. Importations were
usually the better grades of cloth, ironware, implements, etc., and
articles which in the very nature of things the colonists could not
make, as queensware, cutlery, silks, articles of luxury, and wines.
Iron ore was found and smelted from New Jersey to Virginia. In
1755 pig iron to the amount of 3425 tons was sent to England. Rum
was extensively manufactured in New England. It was
made out of the molasses which the sugar islands gave
in exchange for fish, lumber, and food products. It is estimated that
early in the eighteenth century 1,260,000 gallons of rum were made in
Boston annually. Until the whiskey of the Scotch-Irish supplanted
it late in that century, this form of spirits was the common tipple in
America. It was sold everywhere, north and south, and largely ex-
ported to Africa, where it was exchanged for slaves.
England made many restrictions on colonial manufactures; for
she was determined to keep the American market open for her own
inhabitants. In 1700 the colonies learned that they might
not export woollen goods, or send them from one colony British Re-
to another, or sejid them from place to place in the
same colony. In 1732 the exportation of hats and their
intercolonial sale were forbidden by an act of parliament, factures.
This was done at the instance of the London hat makers,
for it was known that the colonists made beaver hats cheaper than
the same articles could be made in England, and were beginning to
gain the market for them both in England and on the continent.
The growth of the iron industry caused alarm to the English iron
makers, and to satisfy them it was enacted in 1750 that the colonies
should export to England only pig and bar iron and that no more
mills for the higher iron products should be erected in the colonies.
Fishing was an important industry in New England. The fact that
French and British fishermen reaped a large harvest in adjacent
waters naturally led the colonists to seek to share it. Fisheries
When the first settlers arrived, the cod was found as far
south as the cape which now bears its name ; but being taken in
large numbers, it retreated northward until finally it must be sought
off Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. In the early stages a rowboat
and some lines sufficed to outfit a fisherman. When one must go to
the northern waters, a larger vessel and a crew of several men were
necessary. Fishing then became a matter of capital and organization.
Sometimes the boats were owned by those who sailed them, the crew
serving for shares. Sometimes they were owned by capitalists, who
gave the crew shares in proportion to the value of the ship. The
early spring witnessed the departure of the fishing fleet. If luck was
good, the craft came in early and were even known to make a second
I42 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
voyage in the same season. The life was perilous and demanded the
best qualities of character and physical endurance. It was an "ex-
cellent school of democracy. By the end of the colonial period share
fishing was being replaced by capitalistic enterprise. The fish mer-
chant, who bought and exported the catch, now became a great factor
in the industry. He sent out the ships, hired the crews, and reaped
the larger part of the reward. Alongside of the cod fisheries de-
veloped whaling. This industry was at first confined to off-shore
fishing, the waters around Nantucket being especially full of these
great fish. But here, too, in time it was necessary to follow the
quarry into distant seas. Large ships were built, voyages became
lengthened from weeks to months, and from months to years, and at
last every ocean was the hunting ground of these hardy New Eng-
landers. The whaling industry lost much of its prosperity with the
discovery of mineral oils in the central West, about the middle of the
nineteenth century.
TRADE
In the northern colonies trade established itself in much the same
way as in England, that is, trading towns on shore and river supported
Towns a mercnant c^ass which distributed merchandise to, and
collected the products from, the people around them.
Also, there arose such large importing centers as Boston, Providence,
New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston. The growth of these
places was rapid, for each was the commercial metropolis of a large
and rapidly developing back country. In 1760 Boston and Phila-
delphia each had a population of 20,000. New York came next with
10,000 ; Charleston, whose merchants exported rice to many parts of
Europe, had 9000, and was the home of much wealth and luxury.
Boston's size was not what might be expected from the oldest city of
the group, located in a large commercial colony. The explanation,
however, is not far to seek. The New England trade was shared by a
number of smaller towns, as Salem, Marblehead, Gloucester, Newport,
Providence, Portsmouth, Falmouth, New Haven, New London, and
Hartford. It was not until the era of manufactures that Boston by
becoming the financial center of a large industrial area attained her
modern predominance.
Meanwhile, Virginia, and to a certain extent Maryland, had a com-
mercial development of their own, the basis of which was the tobacco
trade.- No town of importance was established. In Mary-
Trade in ianci the rise of Baltimore begins with the settlement of
an?Mar - tne Susquehannah valley in the first decades of the eight-
land, eenth century, and in 1760 it had less than 5000 inhabit-
ants. The planters of this region dealt directly with
London or Bristol commission agents. Ships came to their planta-
tion wharves, took aboard the year's crop of tobacco, and returned
REGULATIONS OF TRADE
143
next year with the proceeds in merchandise ordered by the seller.
The river planters were the rich men of their communities. Behind
them on the less fertile high land were the poorer farmers whose small
crops were not profitably consigned to English agents. The large
planters, therefore, became traders, buying the tobacco of their poorer
neighbors and opening plantation stores in which the small
farmers bought necessary merchandise. Under these circumstances,
competition in trade was difficult, and towns could not develop.
More than once the governor by instructions from the crown tried to
get laws passed in the Virginia assembly to encourage them, but the
planters, who controlled that body, were able to defeat his efforts. In
1760 the largest Virginia town was Norfolk, whose prosperity arose
chiefly from the trade which came to it from the Albemarle section of
North Carolina, where the poor harbors prevented the coming of
ocean-going ships. Rice grew in the Cape Fear section which, after
its settlement about 1725, had a thriving export trade from Wilming-
ton ; for its harbor was adequate for the ships of the day.
Spite of the navigation acts (see page 83) colonial trade prospered.
These laws, in fact, benefited colonial shipping in some respects,
since they allowed it to share the monopoly due to ex-
cluding foreign ships from the British trade. Moreover, j^***011
they left fish, food products for the West Indies, lumber, Trade.0
and many other articles, untouched. Of the " enumerated
commodities" of the act of 1660 only one, tobacco, was grown in the
continental colonies. The price of this article, it is true, fell steadily
after 1660, and much suffering ensued in Virginia and Maryland;
and this was of great significance, since tobacco aggregated about
half of the total colonial exports. But with the operation of the law
of 1660 went a series of duties on tobacco in England by
which in Queen Anne's time a pound paid six and a third ^obacco
pence to the royal treasury, which was three times the Trade.
price of the commodity in Virginia. At the same time
there was a vast increase in the colonial supply. It is impossible to
say to which of these three causes one should attach most importance
in accounting for the distress of the planters.
As time passed other articles were added to the " enumerated com-
modities." Rice was placed on the list in 1706, which raised the price
so much that South Carolina lost her trade to Spain and
Portugal, one-tenth of her entire exportation. This,
however, was regained in 1730, when parliament opened
the trade to ports south of Cape Finisterre. In 1706
naval stores and molasses were also added to the list; ties."
but a bounty was placed on the former, and of the latter
only that had been exported which formerly was brought into con-
tinental ports in exchange for products in the West Indies. In 1722
copper, of which very little was produced, and beaver and other
History of
the " Enu-
merated
Commodi-
144 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
skins were placed on the " enumerated " list. Undoubtedly these laws
limited the development of trade, and they raised the price of mer-
chandise by requiring that all goods imported into the
Commerce colonies must come from British ports. But spite of
o/Restric?6 tnese restrictions colonial commerce developed rapidly,
tions. Fish, food products, lumber, and many less important
things were not directly affected by the navigation laws.
Moreover, one must not forget that the navigation acts were never
strictly enforced. Their very existence made it profitable to violate
them ; for both trader's profits and freights were enhanced
Evasion of in the pronibited channels. The most alluring field of
the Naviga- , , . ,, -,-, j r- • i i • •
tion Laws. sucn operations was the French and Spanish colonies in
the West Indies and in Central and South America.
Various means of violating the law were used. One was to bribe
officials to issue permits to trade with foreign sugar colonies, another
was to clear for a British port and visit a foreign place under a false
registry. On returning home a few casks of British sugar on the top
of a large quantity of French sugar would satisfy a conniving customs
inspector ; and if a vessel was seized now and then because the game
did not go smoothly, the ordinary profits were so great that the owner
could stand the loss. Before condemning these people we should re-
member that they considered the laws unjust and that many British
officials in the colonies themselves winked at their violation. The
same conditions followed the enactment of the navigation acts in Eng-
land, where it was estimated that 40,000 persons were engaged in
illegal trade.
In 1733 parliament passed the " Molasses Act," laying prohibitory
duties on molasses, sugar, and rum made in foreign colonies and im-
ported into the British colonies in America. It grew out
The" Mo- of the compiaint of the British sugar islands that the
X733.8 ^ C ' French and Dutch islands sold their molasses to the New
England rum manufacturers, who, it was intended, should
now take their raw product from the British colonies, whatever the
price. The British islands did not produce enough molasses for the
rum makers, and the situation thus created was preposterous. The
law became practically a dead letter soon after it was passed. Some
ingenious Yankees avoided it by sailing from Jamaica with cargoes of
empty casks formally cleared as molasses. Stopping at a French island
these barrels would be filled, and the Jamaica clearance protected them
on the return to New England. The "Molasses Act" did much to
turn New Englanders against England and to teach them to despise
her laws.
The slave trade was an important feature of the commerce of
Boston, Rhode Island ports, New York, and Philadelphia. Laden
with rum, a vessel would sail for Guinea, the Congo, or Madagascar,
and exchange her cargo for slaves, palm oil, or gold dust. The slaves,
RACE ELEMENTS 145
" black ivory," were bought in 1676 for three pounds each and were
worth seventeen in Jamaica. By 1760 the demand for them had
raised the prices so that they now cost twelve pounds each
in Africa and brought thirty-five in Jamaica. A ship T^de
that carried two hundred negroes under these conditions
netted a handsome profit to her owner. Before 1698 the slave trade
was monopolized by the Royal African Company ; but in this year it
was thrown open, and the colonial shipowners took an active part in
it. Most of the slave ships sailed from Africa to the West Indies or
to the southern English colonies. The slave trade necessarily inflicted
horrors on the imported negroes. They were crowded into holds
without ventilation. If a storm was encountered, the hatches were
nailed down and left so until it abated, when the hungry and thirsty
wretches were allowed on deck again, and at such a time there were
usually dead bodies to be brought out. The "Middle Passage," as
the voyage was called, was long a synonym of terror; and this was
true in spite of efforts of the slave's captain to reduce the hardship.
For since his slaves sold best if they seemed healthy and strong, it was
to his interest to feed and care for them as well as possible.
RACE ELEMENTS IN COLONY PLANTING
The beginning of all the colonies but New York and Delaware was
English. The English life and law was the rule, or became so when
the foreign planted colonies fell into English hands. New
England, dominated by peculiar ideals, received only a
small stream of immigration after the restoration of the English.
Stuarts, 1660. It remained the most English of the great
sections of America until the era of manufacturing began about 1808.
The English stock filled the eastern parts of Virginia, Maryland, and
the Carolinas, and most of New Jersey, while it mingled with the
Dutch of New York and Delaware and was the controlling element in
early Pennsylvania. But in all the middle and southern colonies
were many non-English persons who came singly or in small groups.
Such was the situation about 1680. At that time opened a new era
of American immigration. Into the valleys that lie
east of the Alleghanies, from southern New York to Georgia, ^JjJJ£es of
came a vast tide of settlers — some of them colony born, Population,
but most of them of foreign Protestant origin. The
foreigners are to be distinguished in the following groups :
i. The Huguenots. They began to arrive with the revocation of
the Edict of Nantes, 1685. They settled in several colonies, but the
Santee river region of South Carolina received the largest Hu enotg
number. Here in a compact settlement they preserved
their own church organization, accumulated fortunes, and became a
center from which a French influence was transmitted to other parts
146 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
of the colony. Some of the leading soldiers, politicians, merchants,
and literary men of South Carolina were of this stock. Another
Huguenot settlement was on the James river, near Richmond, Vir-
ginia ; and another, on Pamplico river in North Carolina, began well
but was nearly extinguished in the Indian war of 1711. There were
also many of this faith among the settlers in New York. Coming
singly or in small numbers, Huguenots settled in many places. Of all
the great European nations France has contributed the smallest por-
tion of the American population.
2. The Germans. The Mennonites, German Quakers, were induced
to come to Pennsylvania soon after it became a colony. The move-
Germans ment began in 1683 with the settlement of German town
by a group under Rev. Daniel F. Pastorious. About
1710 a great wave of German immigration began, the origin of which
was the devastation of the Palatinate by Louis XIV of France.
Most Palatines were Protestants, and a large number fled to England
for succor. Huddled together in tents, objects of charity, it seemed
well to send them to the colonies. The government gave aid, and
five hundred were sent to the help of de Graffenreid, who was taking
a small Swiss colony to found New Berne, North Carolina. The
Indian massacre in 1711 fell heavily on this settlement, many of whose
members fell or fled; but a small remainder continued on the spot.
In the same year three thousand Palatines arrived in New York, where
Governor Hunter set them to preparing pine trees for making tar.
The industry proved a failure, and the Palatines moved to the Scho-
harie valley, where the Mohawks sold them land. When the colonial
authorities demanded that they also have English deeds from their
hands, a large number refused, and moved to Pennsylvania, settling
near Reading. In this migration was the father of the noted Conrad
Weiser, long prominent as an intermediary between the whites and the
Indians. By this time the Pennsylvanians had discovered the possi-
bilities of the German peasantry as a source of indented labor. Plausi-
ble agents went everywhere in the Rhine valley, proclaiming the riches
of the province. They collected great numbers who articled came to
Philadelphia, where they were transferred to agents who led them
about the colony until they were disposed of to the farmers. The
German " redemptioners " suffered much hardship, as did most of
the indented servants who came to the colonies ; but they had good
powers of resistance, and, their service ended, they settled into sturdy
and thrifty citizens. Not all the German immigrants were servants,
however. Many came as small farmers, or artisans. The Pennsyl-
vania counties of Berks and Lancaster, and the Lehigh and Lebanon
valleys received most of this stock, and in 1760 they were about one-
third of the population of the colony. They were divided into many
sects, and clung tenaciously to their language. From the Pennsyl-
vania settlements an overflow reached Virginia, in the Shenandoah
THE SCOTCH-IRISH 147
valley, and North Carolina, where they made a large portion of the
population of the Yadkin and Catawba valleys. Among the Germans
a prominent group were the Moravians, followers of Huss, who after
a discouraging attempt in Georgia settled Bethlehem, Pennsylvania,
from which a colony about the middle of the century settled Salem,
in North Carolina. Many Germans moved from Pennsylvania into
New Jersey.
3. The Scotch-Irish. It was also Penn's liberal policy which first
turned these people toward America. They were the descendants of
those Scotch Presbyterians whom James I settled in North
Ireland, hoping thus to turn that country from Catholi- JJ^80
cism. After a century of conflict with a barren soil and un-
friendly surroundings they were as poor as when they began, and the
native Irish were no whit less Catholic. Seasoned by this experience
they made the best frontiersmen in America, where both natural and
human environment was more favorable than in Ireland. They began
to come to Pennsylvania in considerable numbers early in the eight-
eenth century, settling in Lancaster county and to the west of it as far
as Pittsburg. From that region they turned into New Jersey, or
crossed the narrow part of Maryland into Virginia, moving thence
into North Carolina. By 1760 they were going into every valley in
this region, and another stream, coming from Charleston, was filling
the South Carolina uplands. The sons of these immigrants, still
loving the pioneer life with its perils and its rewards, passed over the
Alleghanies and laid the foundations of Kentucky and Tennessee.
Of this stock came John C. Calhoun, Andrew Jackson, and many
another important leader.
4. Minor Groups. Besides the Dutch in New York and the Swedes
in Delaware one ought also to remember the Swiss. If but few of
them remained in de Graffenried's settlement at New
Berne, North Carolina, a still larger number settled and
survived in Pennsylvania. Speaking the same language,
most of them were confounded with the Germans. Another dis-
tinctive element was the Scotch Highlanders, who came in large bands
to the Cape Fear valley after the failure of their cause at Culloden,
1745. Like the Scotch-Irish, they were stout Presbyterians. Scotch
traders were found in every port. The same was true, but to a less
extent, of the Jews. In New York, Rhode Island, and Philadelphia
these shrewd traders of both races were important factors in business.
The Welsh were not a large colonizing race, but small settlements
were found in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and per-
haps other colonies. The Irish, as distinguished from the Scotch-
Irish, furnished no distinct colony group of importance ; but they
contributed largely to the laboring class from the earliest times, and
were widely distributed.
But the best colonizers were native-born colonists. Every settled
148 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
community produced men of adventurous disposition, to whom the
forest was more attractive than the farmsteads of the
TheAmeri- East. Selling their lands, if they had any, they turned
Frontiers- westward where axe and rifle would enable them to found
men. homes and enjoy freedom in a new settlement. They
were not thrifty, and they have left few memorials except
the paths they made and the fields they cleared, but they did important
and lasting work for posterity.
RELIGION IN THE COLONIES
The Puritan churches in New England, and the Established Church
elsewhere were the strongest religious organizations in the colonies.
Along with them went a large number of smaller
churches, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Dutch Reform, and
Churches. Baptist. This enumeration does not include the Roman
Catholics, who were numerous only in Maryland. After
the first days of settlement most of the immigrants came to America
from purely economic motives. They took land where they wished,
and for years a new community might care little for church or baptism.
But as it became populous the churches concerned were apt to begin
to gather up their own people into congregations, to establish meeting-
places, and to send preachers. This was especially true of the settle-
ment of the interior. Too much cannot be said in appreciation of
these efforts as a civilizing influence. Often the preacher was the
only man from the outside world who ever visited the valley in
which his flock was located. He was usually the herald of schools,
and the counselor of social reform.
Creating two royal provinces in New England — Massachusetts and
New Hampshire — weakened Puritanism there. Anglican churches
appeared in the principal towns, and in them the royal
TheAngli- governors and their friends, to the horror of the stricter
in1NewirC Puritans, instituted the celebration of Christmas and
England. Easter, as well as funerals and marriages according to the
elaborate ceremonies of the English Church. Anglicans
also protested against being taxed by the towns to pay the Puritan
ministers' salaries ; and it was finally enacted in Massachusetts and
Connecticut that this burden should be remitted when there was an
Anglican organized congregation in the town in question.
But the Puritan regime received its strongest check from internal
causes. By 1690 the original settlers were dead. The new generation
was American-born and did not feel so keenly as their
fathers the old resentment toward the Anglican Church.
Puritanism. Nor did they hold so strictly to the older dogmas. At
the head of this modernist feeling was Harvard College
and some of the Boston ministers. Opposed to it was a reactionary^
party, regretting the decay of the old faith, and striving under the
[D THE WITCHES
149
lead of Increase and Cotton Mather to bring back the existing
generation to the older faith. This party was strong in the rural
towns. It was through its predominance that the witchcraft incident
of 1688-1693 stained the page of Massachusetts history.
« During the Middle Ages, all Christendom believed in witchcraft
and voiced in laws the Biblical injunction, "Thou shalt not suffer a
witch to live." The Puritans, accustomed to interpret The Exist
the Bible literally, accepted this as final ; and in the ence 0f1S
colonies as well as in England they thought death should Witches
be the penalty for witchcraft. It is for opposing witch- Generally
craft with death that history condemns the ruling party in Conceded'
Massachusetts, but it should be content to condemn the excessive
and blind zeal with which the law was executed in this particular case.
New England Puritans believed thoroughly in the guidance of God.
When, for example, their charter was threatened the council implored
divine enlightenment and believed that God wished them to resist.
For all that, the charter was lost. This but increased the despair of
those who saw everywhere a relaxation of the pure faith of their
fathers. The ravages of the Indians were not forgotten
before this new calamity was upon them. To the stricter
party it seemed that the anger of God was heavy on his
people, and the natural consequence was a heightening of mysticism.
Circumstances turned this tendency of the time so that it hit upon
witchcraft. About 1680 a number of clergymen around Boston began
to investigate the history of witchcraft in New England. A short
time later Increase Mather, in a book called "Illustrious
Providences/' described the nature of witchcraft, and his The
pedantic son, Cotton Mather, desiring to study the sub-
ject experimentally, began to gather data for a book on craft.
"The Wonders of the Invisible World," a discussion of the
"nature, number, and operations of the devils." In 1688 two chil-
dren of Boston declared themselves bewitched by an Irish laundress,
who was tried and executed. He took the two girls to his own house,
observed their actions, and published his conclusions in 1689. Thus
the public mind was made ready for the sad affair at Salem.
In a village (now Danvers) in the town of Salem some girls who had
been reading about and discussing witchcraft began to act in the
strange ways bewitched persons were said to act, and they
alleged that certain friendless old persons had cast spells
upon them. The pastor of the town accepted their state- Salem
ment and demanded the punishment of the witches. In-
vestigation was had, but the whole community was so excited that a
cool judgment was impossible, and the verdict of ministers and lay-
men was that witches, emissaries of the devil, were brazenly established
in the village. Many accused persons were arrested, while the village
and several other communities held days of fast and prayer to avoid
150 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
this additional infliction of divine anger. Then the governor was re-
quested to appoint a special high court to try the imprisoned ones.
He complied, and in the summer of 1692 nineteen persons were con-
victed and executed for witchcraft. By this time the people of the
country were in terror of the witch-hunters, and many persons when
accused admitted guilt and sought to escape punishment by throwing
the blame on others. The court took "spectral" evidence, i.e. when
a " bewitched" person declared he saw an alleged witch coming in the
form of a yellow bird it was held good evidence, though no one else
could say he saw a yellow bird. To declare that the prosecutions were
foolish was to bring down a charge of witchcraft on oneself. At
first only miserable old men and women were accused. But in time
people of high social position were aimed at, one of them being the
wife of the governor himself. At last public opinion underwent a
revulsion, the special court was dissolved, and the prisons were emptied.
After a while reason resumed sway and the conservative leaders
suffered a loss of influence.
The doctrines of the liberals, however, caused dismay in many quar-
ters. One of the innovations was a relaxation of the old doctrine of
conversion. In 1662 it had been agreed that conversion
wa*6 Cove**' was not essential to church membership. In a regime in
nant." which civil status depended on church relations this was
rather a natural conclusion. But it found steady opposi-
tion with those who insisted that the ancient faith should be preserved.
It was scornfully referred to as "The Halfway Convenant." It was
even declared by the more venturesome of the party that many min-
isters had not been converted. In 1734 there began in Northampton,
Massachusetts, through the preaching of Jonathan Edwards, a great
« G revival, the foundation of which was the necessity of con-
Awakening1* versi°n- The preacher was eloquent and fervid, and under
his fiery words many persons were convcted of sin, fell into
trances, or shouted joyfully in the assurance of forgiveness. The
meetings attracted attention throughout western Massachusetts, and
much was done to create a more fervent spiritual life. In 1740, when
the fame of the Northampton meetings was still fresh, George White-
field, former associate of the Wesleys and a most remarkable preacher,
arrived in New England. At first he was received favorably by all
parties and his meetings, attended by immense crowds, resulted in pro-
fessions of conversion by many thousands. His strong insistence on
the necessity of conversion at last aroused the opposition of the liberal
clergy. He replied in kind, and soon the colony was divided into two
religious factions. The same result appeared in Connecticut. Both
Harvard and Yale colleges were opposed to the revival in its later
stages. Whitefield is not prominent in the movement after 1745, but
he was followed by many earnest preachers who had less ability. The
upshot was a separatist movement, the seceders largely joining the
THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 151
Baptists. The "Great Awakening" was also strong on Long Island
and in New Jersey, where many New Englanders had settled.
In this connection one must not forget the significance of Rhode
Island in the cause of toleration. To Roger Williams and his followers
was due the steady assertion of this theory, in the face of
the strict Puritan conformity in the adjacent colonies. Religious
Small as his colony was, it was a safe refuge for all who Rhe0edde°^.in
demanded freedom of worship. He received the Quakers land,
and refused to persecute them, although he believed their
doctrines false and dangerous. The seed he sowed bore fruit many
years afterwards. Rhode Island, through this course, became a home
of sects, and their clashing purposes often produced social confusion,
but the religious history of America could not well do without their
influence.
The English Church was established by law in Virginia, Maryland,
and the Carolinas. In the first it was recognized in the beginning of
of the colony's existence. At this time the Puritans had
not begun to leave the Church of England, and the result J^ Sch
was that "Low Church" forms were planted in this, the -m Virginia,
oldest colony, the effects of which survive to this day.
But dissenters were not tolerated, and in 1643 a law, passed under the
influence of Governor Berkeley, forbade any other than an Anglican min-
ister to conduct religious services in the colony. Late in the century
the Baptists began to appear, and seem to have suffered little inconven-
ience. The coming of the Scotch-Irish, all of them Presbyterians,
in the eighteenth century made matters worse. At first they were
ignored by the religious authorities, but when traveling preachers ap-
peared and began to gather them and any others whom they could in-
fluence into churches the Anglican pastors protested. The ministers
were arrested because they had no licenses, but the juries generally
acquitted them. Thus broke down the attempt to exclude all but the
Anglican faith from Virginia. By 1760 the Presbyterians, Baptists,
and Quakers were well planted in the colony.
In the beginning, Maryland, though settled by Catholics, had no
church establishment. In 1649, when Puritanism was supreme in
England, the assembly passed an act for religious tolera-
tion. If it was passed, as seems probable, to enable Balti-
more to continue in possession as proprietor, it at least Carolines,
was a good example. But it did not satisfy the Protes-
tants, who were a large majority of the population ; and in 1692 and
1702 they carried laws establishing the English Church, and those
were followed by severe laws against the Roman Catholics. South
Carolina established Anglicanism in 1706, after a long struggle with the
dissenters, the victory being won at last by a combination with the
Huguenots, who were in return given the status of an establishment in
the parishes in which they were the large majority of the population.
152 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
In North Carolina a law to establish the church was adopted about the
same time by manipulation during the troublous era of the Gary Re-
bellion, but there were so few adherents to the Anglican Church in the
colony that it was enforced in only three or four parishes. In 1765
there were only five Anglican clergymen in the province. In these
colonies the law provided for parishes, usually identical with the
counties and for a tax paid by all to support the clergymen. The
parish affairs were left to vestries, self-perpetuating in Virginia and
North Carolina, but chosen by the freeholders in Maryland and South
Carolina. There was much complaint about the morals of the es-
tablished clergy in Virginia and Maryland, "Cock-fighting parsons"
being the term with which posterity dubbed them. Some of the
clergymen seem to have fairly won the epithet.
f In New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware no laws
could be passed to establish one form of religion. Here the dissenters
prevailed, each racial element having its own religious
Colonies f°rms to which were added many others of non-racial
origin. Pennsylvania was particularly concerned with
them. "Africa is not more full of monsters," wrote a horrified Anglican
clergyman, "than Pennsylvania is of sects." In New York the gov-
ernor tried to give the Anglican Church the position of an establishment
by limiting the right of ministers of other churches to preach. The
attempt failed, but he got the assembly to give certain churches the
right of support by public taxation. The British Toleration act of
1689 giving liberty of worship to dissenters in England and Wales, but
in no way favoring the Catholics, had its reaction in America. It was
reenacted in Virginia, Massachusetts, New York, and in other colonies.
Feeling in England and America was then strong against the Catholics,
who were believed to be plotting to regain England through the res-
toration of the Stuarts. Virginia required them to take the test-oath
if they gave evidence or held office; New York and Massachusetts,
with eyes on the missionaries to the Indians, forbade a
o/the"1611* Catholic priest within their respective jurisdictions.
Catholics. Maryland, although only about 3000 out of a total pop-
ulation of 40,000 were Catholics, forbade the public cele-
bration of the Roman services, nor could any of that faith teach school
or purchase lands.
The administration of the Anglican Church was under the direction
of the Bishop of London, who ordained ministers for the provinces.
In 1689 he adopted the policy of having a commissary
of London P to rePresent him in ar colony, James Blair being appointed
'~ for Virginia and Thomas Bray for Maryland. A com-
missary had the right to inquire into the conduct of the clergy, but he
could not dismiss an incumbent. In 1701 was organized the Society
for the Propagation of the Gospel, a missionary organization which sent
ministers to most of the colonies. The reports of these missionaries
are an important source of knowledge of colonial social conditions.
SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES 153
EDUCATION AND CULTURE IN THE COLONIES
In another place this book treats of the origin of the New England
public school system, probably the chief educational institution of
the day (see page 476). Aside from that one must notice
the beginning of the American college and the general
attitude of the people toward middle schools. The first
step toward providing higher education in any continental English
colony was taken by the liberal group of which Sir Edwin Sandys was
leader, when in 1620 a university was decreed for Henrico, in Virginia.
A beginning was actually made, a teacher was employed, and funds
were subscribed, but the Indian massacre of 1622 wiped out all traces
of town and university. As the enterprise had depended on philan-
thropic gentlemen in England, who now lost control of the colony,
and as it had little support by the people in Virginia, it was not revived.
The next step was taken by the general court of Massachusetts,
which in 1636 voted 400 pounds for a "shoale or colledge" to educate
the English and Indians in "knowledge and Godliness."
In 1638 Rev. John Harvard died, leaving the college a
legacy of books and money, and from him the institution
was called Harvard College. In 1650 it was formally in- X636.
corporated. The town in which it was situated was called
Cambridge, from the English university town in which several of the
Massachusetts ministers had studied. Two degrees were offered,
Bachelor of Arts, for which the requirement was ability to read the
Old and New Testaments in the originals and to translate them into
Latin ; and Master of Arts, for which seven years' study was necessary,
as in Cambridge and Oxford. In a new colony it was not always
possible to live up to these excellent standards, but for over half a
century Harvard was the only center of learning in America, and it
furnished New England during this time with a body of well-taught
ministers.
By 1700 Harvard was identified with the religious liberals, spite of
the fact that Increase Mather was its president. This displeased the
conservatives, who were at length rejoiced to know that a
new college, sound in theology, was in 1701 established
in Connecticut. Eli Yale, who had been governor of I70I>
Madras, gave it a sum of money, and in 1718 it was called
Yale College. After tentative location at several places, it was in
1716 definitely placed at New Haven. Its governing body and
faculty were required to accept the Saybrook Platform, a statement
of faith formulated by a legislative commission and adopted by the
assembly in 1708. Yale maintained outward conformity to this type
of orthodoxy for a century, but by 1750 it had advanced far on the
road of liberalism.
I54 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
In 1691 Commissary Blair arrived in London to try to get a royal
charter and to raise funds for a college in Virginia. When he broached
the matter to Attorney- General Seymour, whose aid he
William and needed, he was asked why the colony desired a college.
Coll? e ^e answer was that it would furnish an educated ministry
Founded, to save the souls of the colonists. "Souls!" exclaimed
1693. Seymour, "D — n your Souls! Make tobacco!" But
the commissary had great Scotch persistence, his request
succeeded, and in 1693 a royal charter was issued for William and
Mary College. It created a college and "free school" under the aus-
pices of the Anglican Church. Commissary Blair was its first presi-
dent, and its professors were clergymen. It had a large influence in
colonial Virginia. Williamsburg, where it was located, soon became
the capital of the colony and an attractive colonial society grew up under
the protection of the governor and the college. For some years the
"free school," free only in the sense that it admitted all students who
met the intellectual and financial requirements, was the chief feature.
When the curriculum of the college was organized, it had less Hebrew
and Syriac than Harvard, but there was more of general culture.
Thus at the beginning of the eighteenth century Anglicanism and the
two branches of New England Puritanism had each its college. Fifty
years later other religious organizations were developed
Colonial so stron&ty tnat they also could venture to establish seats
Colleges. °f learning. The first of these was the College of New
Jersey, now Princeton University, established in 1746.
Its support was Presbyterian, and it drew largely for a hundred years
from the Scotch-Irish population extending from New Jersey south-
ward. It is probable that the Great Awakening stimulated its crea-
tion. By this time the desire for colleges as expressions of local pride
had come into existence ; and in 1 749 the University of Pennsylvania
was founded, in 1754 King's College, now Columbia, in 1764 Rhode
Island College, now Brown University, and in 1769 Dartmouth Col-
lege in New Hampshire. In all these institutions except
the University of Pennsylvania the chief impulse to found
and Higher tne co^ege came from a church. Higher education at the
Education, time found its support in America in the necessity for the
education of the ministers. In the charters of Yale,
William and Mary, Princeton, King's (Anglican), and Brown (Bap-
tist) arrangements were made to perpetuate the influence of the re-
spective churches which founded them. Higher education in America,
now so well able to stand on its own feet, was born of religion and long
nourished by it.
As to subjects taught, the colleges began with the high ideal of re-
producing English college curricula. Harvard is supposed to have
been modeled after Emanuel College, Oxford, at which several Massa-
chusetts men had studied. But the wilderness does not favor intel-
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE COLONIES 155
lectual culture. The Emanuel men eventually passed away, and a
colony-born generation took their places. Neither here nor elsewhere
was actual education higher than in a good modern prepar-
atory school. The colleges, like other features of American
life, began low and developed slowly out of their own ex-
perience. The very conditions around them made them in colonial
times but large academies, but they have gradually lifted themselves
out of these conditions.
The southern and middle colonies had a few public schools, but
private schools were widely established. Often they were taught by
clergymen. In the towns, as Philadelphia and New York,
schools were early established. In the South the planters schools
cooperated in supporting schools for their own children.
The subjects taught were elementary. The elements of Latin and
Greek were given to those who sought to enter a college. How much
this was may be seen in John Adams's entrance examination at Harvard
m 1751. He was required to write a good hand and with the aid of a
Latin grammar and dictionary to translate a piece of English into
Latin.
Cultured men were found in the colonies from the beginning. Prob-
ably they were more numerous in the early years of a colony's history,
because the contact with England was then closest. In the
first fifty years of her existence Virginia saw the production culture
of many books about her history ; in the second fifty years
the output was smaller. The richest planters of Virginia, Maryland,
and South Carolina educated their sons in England. Colonel William
Byrd, of Virginia, a man of fine mental gifts, was trained in England
and Holland, though not in a university, and spent many years in
London, where he had some of the leading literary men for his
associates. His old age he spent in Virginia, where he relieved the
tedious hours by writing some of the sprightliest English prose that
colonial America produced. Philadelphia was distinguished for a
group of scientists, chief of whom were Franklin and James A. Logan.
Boston was the center of an indigenous literary movement. It
showed little immediate English influence and was, undoubtedly, the
flowering of New England culture, nourished faithfully by Harvard
and the congregational ministry. Several of the royal governors were
notable friends of culture. But in this field we must not assert too
much. Poets and essayists we had, and a few historians ; but they
rarely rise into high rank.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN THE COLONIES
Three types of loyal government appeared in the English colonies ;
the county, the town, and the mixed type. The first came with the
settlement of Virginia and was an adaptation of the English county
156 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
to Virginia conditions. The county was a unit of representation in the
lower house of the assembly. Over it was a sheriff and a lieutenant-
colonel of the militia. It had local justices of the peace
The County. W^Q were appointed by the governor and council, as a rule
men of social and political prominence. They held the county court
of quarter sessions, which was both an administrative and judicial
body. In the former capacity it supervised the roads, apportioned
taxes, cared for county property, and looked after any general business
relating to the county. As a court it tried minor cases, although few
justices were lawyers. Sheriff, lieutenant-colonel, and clerk of the
court were generally appointed by the governor. In the southern
county, as normally organized, the only elective office was member
of the assembly. He was chosen by the freeholders, all meeting at one
voting precinct, the ballot being viva wee. Under such conditions
the governor with the council had great power. He selected the
county officials from the leading families, and they usually controlled
the election of assemblyman, who in turn became the governor's ad-
viser as to the further appointment of county officials. The office-
holding oligarchy of a southern county was an aristocratic influence,
genuinely English in character, usually honest and efficient, and of
sound American principles, as the local history of the revolutionary
era shows.
The New England town was a revival of the early English town,
which for centuries had survived in the English parish, both a civil and
an ecclesiastical institution. The fundamental idea was
ErTiatuT that the business of the town should be transacted in
Town"1 town meeting by all the qualified freemen. In earliest
New England these were the persons of good standing in
the town church; but as the king objected to the exclusion of An-
glicans from the suffrage, it was provided that any person of good
character could be admitted to the suffrage on the certificate of a min-
ister. This rule, discretely administered, relieved pressure from the
exclusion of Anglicans, but left the control of town affairs safely
within the church. The town meeting levied the taxes, appointed
selectmen who executed its rules, chose subordinate officers, and
supervised roads, bridges, and public property.. Any voter might
speak in town meeting ; but it was part of the genius of the people to
respect the advice of the elders. The minister had great influence in
town affairs, the selectmen were the men of wealth and prominence,
and between the two the direction of local affairs was in as restricted a
group as in the South. Here, too, it must be said that the oligarchy
ruled well. It was honest, patriotic, and economical, and it gave
satisfaction to the majority.
The mixed form first appears in New York. When Nicolls con-
quered New Amsterdam, eastern Long Island was settled by New
Englanders, who had never acknowledged the right of the Dutch over
PAPER MONEY 157
them. They had bought their lands from the Indians, established
town meetings without authority from any superior, and desired to go
on as they had begun. As they had helped Nicolls
against Stuyvesant he could not ignore their request. The Mixcd
Neither could he grant it ; for the Duke of York meant to Load Gov-
rule his province by absolute right, so far as he could. The eminent,
result was a compromise which the Long Islanders accepted
with disappointment. Nicolls prepared a code of laws on the basis of
the enactments of the assemblies at Boston and New Haven and pro-
claimed it as law for the Long Island towns, where it was known as the
uDuke Laws." It provided that the town administration be in the
hands of overseers and constables elected by freeholders, but there
was to be no town meeting. Local justice was to be administered, as
in the South, by judges appointed by the governor. In a few years the
"Duke's Laws" were extended to the rest of the province. In
Nicolls's time there was no legislature. When it later came into
existence, the county, made up by a union of several towns, became the
basis of representation. Thus we have a system of counties divided
into towns, or townships, imitated in the other middle colonies, and
largely reproduced in the newer states of the union. Indeed, its ad-
vantages are so obvious that it has since the civil war been adopted in
modified forms in the Southern states.
PAPER MONEY IN THE COLONIES
Until the end of the seventeenth century specie was the money
generally used throughout the world, but shortly before that time it
had been discovered that a state's promise to pay might be
made to serve as currency, although no country had used Th®
the invention extensively. To issue bills which might be
paid back to the government for taxes and then destroyed Money,
seemed a wonderful idea, and it was destined to be tried
on a large scale in the colonies, where neither gold nor silver was
mined, and where there was always a demand for money to develop
the abundant natural resources. The idea was seductive, but it ig-
nored the fundamental law that the volume of currency should be
nearly stable in proportion to population. To increase it by a new issue
would undoubtedly aid the debtors temporarily, but it worked a
counteracting hardship to the capitalists, and to contract it would in-
jure the borrowers while it benefited the capitalists. As the majority
of people were not lenders they were continually asking for more paper
money, once they learned of its effects, and they generally protested
loudly against attempts to reduce its volume. The capitalists, mer-
chants, and town's people generally, continually opposed such cur-
rency, and they had the support of the crown, which usually was
tender of the interests of the trading class. Out of this opposition of
158 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
purpose grew up in most of the colonies important political divisions
which seriously affected the people's loyalty to the mother country.
The first colony to have paper money was Massachusetts. In
1690 an unsuccessful expedition against Quebec left the treasury in
debt and to pay it off notes were issued and made receivable
Massa- for public dues. In the wars that followed and lasted until
Leads the ^e French were driven out of Canada there were many
Way. similar issues, so that by 1745 a silver dollar was worth
eleven dollars in currency. Other New England colonies
had followed the example set them, and the whole country was over-
whelmed with depreciated paper. The ruling classes, chiefly in the
seacoast towns, were dismayed at the situation, and when parliament
voted 175,000 pounds sterling to repay Massachusetts for her expenses
in the expedition which took Louisburg, 1 745, they were able to get a vote
passed for the redemption of the outstanding notes at the rate of seven
and a half for one. After that the currency of the colony was specie.
Massachusetts^ lead in issuing paper currency was followed in most
of the other colonies, Virginia being the most conspicuous opponent of
the paper money system; and even she yielded in 1755.
Colonies ^ne ^argest issues were in Rhode Island, New Jersey, Penn-
sylvania, and the Carolinas. In these colonies the de-
mand for currency became a veritable fiat money craze. Bills were
printed and lent to individuals on the security of lands and commodi-
ties. Sometimes it was issued by the public direct and sometimes
through corporations on a very slender basis of specie. Virginia's
reluctance to employ this kind of money was not so much due to cor-
rect ideas of finance as to her habit of using tobacco for currency.
Tobacco when not sold immediately was deposited in public ware-
houses, and the certificates received by the depositors were transferred
to other persons in payment of debt or for trade.
The protests of the merchants against the payment of debts in
colonial paper soon reached the ears of the British government.
Accordingly, colonial governors were instructed to allow
Efforts of tne passage of no more acts authorizing paper money,
tcTcheck11 and sometimes tnose already passed were vetoed in Eng-
the Craze. land. But the governors were not always able to obey their
instructions without arousing more resistance than they
cared to encounter. During the last struggle with France, 1754 to
1763, the colonies took the plausible ground that they could not fur-
nish troops in aid of the war unless they be allowed to issue more
p'aper money, and when this argument was insisted upon it usually
prevailed. The irritation occasioned by the efforts of the crown to
check paper money weakened the respect of the people for the British
government, and was a powerful factor in preparing them for participa-
tion in the revolution. It also opened the way for the flood of public
notes which inundated the country as soon as independence was declared.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 159
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
General social conditions in the colonies are described with commendable fullness
in Channing, History of the United States, 3 vols. (1907-1912); Andrews,
Colonial Self -Government (1904); Greene, Provincial America (1905); and Doyle,
English Colonies in America, 5 vols. (1882-1907). On special sections or colonies
see : Weeden, Economic and Social History of New England, 2 vols. (1896) ; Bruce,
Economic History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, 2 vols. (1896); Ibid.,
Institutional History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century, 2 vols. (1910);
Ibid., Social History of Virginia in the Seventeenth Century (1907) ; William Byrd,
Writings of (ed. 1901), the introduction, by J. S. Bassett, presents a history of
the Byrd family with its various industrial, social, and political activities ; McCrady,
South Carolina under Royal Government (1899).
On conditions of labor see : McCormac, White Servitude in Maryland (Johns
Hopkins Studies, 1904) ; Ballagh, White Servitude in Virginia (Ibid., 1895) ; Bassett,
Servitude and Slavery in the Colony of North Carolina (Ibid., 1896) ; Geiser, Redemp-
tioners and Indented Servants in Pennslyvania (Supplement to Yale Review, 1901) ;
Brackett, The Negro in Maryland (1889); Ballagh, Slavery in Virginia (1902);
Weeks, Southern Quakers and Slavery (1896) ; Du Bois, Suppression of the African
Slave Trade (1896) ; and Channing, Narragansett Planters (Johns Hopkins Studies,
1886).
Books of travel are: Kalm, Travels in North America (trans. 1770, and later
eds.), by a Swede who visited the colonies in 1749-1750; Madam Knight, Journal,
1704-1705 (ed. 1825, 1865), relates chiefly to New England; Whitefield, Journal
of a Voyage from London to Savannah [1737-1738] (1739); and Keith, Travels
from New Hampshire to Caratuck (1706, 1851), warmly Anglican and bitter against
dissenters. A most valuable contemporary source is Samuel Sewall, Diary, 1674-
1729 (Mass. Hist. Soc. Collections, 5th ser. V-VII).
See also : Dunton, Letters from New England, 1686 (Prince Society Publications,
1867); Alsop, Character of the Province of Maryland (1666, 1903); Hammond,
Leah and Rachael, or the Two Fruitful Sisters, Virginia and Maryland (1656) ;
Wilson, Account of the Province of Carolina (in Carroll, Hist. Collections, 2 vols.
(1836) ; Ashe, Carolina, a Description of the Present State of the Country (Ibid.),
both Wilson and Ashe deal with South Carolina ; Denton, Brief Description of
New York (1670, 1903) ; Miller, Description of the Province and City of New York
(1695; 1903); Wolley, Two Years' Journal (1701, 1902); Thomas, Historical and
Geographical Account of West New Jersey and Pensilvania (1698, 1903) ; and
Budd, Good Order Established in Pennsylvania and New Jersey (1685, 1902).
For race element see : Kuhns, German and Swiss Settlements of Colonial Penn-
sylvania (1901), with a bibliography; Bernheim, German Settlements in North
and South Carolina (1872) ; Fries, The Moravians in Georgia and North Carolina
(1905); Green, Scotch-Irish in America (Am. Antiqu. Soc. Proceedings, vol. X),
a good essay; and Baird, Huguenot Emigration to America, 2 vols. (1885), good
for genealogical purposes.
On religious conditions : Cross, The Anglican Episcopate and the American Colonies
(Harvard Studies, 1902) ; Anderson, The Church of England in the Colonies, 3 vols.
(ed. 1856); Perry, History of the American Episcopal Church, 2 vols. (1885); W.
Walker, Ten New England Leaders (1901) ; Dexter, Congregationalism as Seen in
Its Literature (1880) ; Lauer, Church and State in New England (Johns Hopkins
Studies, 1892) ; Backus, History of New England with Particular Reference to th»
Baptists (ed. 1871); Checkley; Evolution of Religious Tolerance in Massachusetts
Bay, 2 vols. (1897); Upham, Salem Witchcraft, 2 vols. (1876), to be read with
Poole's criticism (N. Am. Rev. CVIII) ; and Tracey, The Great Awakening (1842).
Intellectual and educational development are described in: Tyler, History of
American Literature, 1607-1765, 2 vols. (ed. 1897) ; Thomas, History of Printing
(Am. Antiqu. Soc. Archaologia Americana, 1874); Trent, American Literature
(1903), a short manual; Quincy, History of Harvard University, 2 vols. (ed. 1860);
160 SOCIAL PROGRESS IN COLONIES
Dexter, Sketch of the History of Yale University (1887) ; Kingsley, Yale College,
2 vpls. (1879) ; Adams, The College of William and Mary (U. S. Bureau of Edu-
cation, Circulars, 1887); and Thwing, History of Higher Education in America
(1906).
On the colonial local government: Osgood, The American Colonies in the
Seventeenth Century, 3 vols. (1904-1907) ; Mereness, Maryland as a Proprietary
Province (1901) ; Howard, Local Constitutional History, vol. I (1889) ; Channing,
Town and County Government in the English Colonies (Johns Hopkins Studies,
1884); and Greene, The Provincial Governor (Harvard Studies, 1898).
For Independent Reading
Franklin, Autobiography (many eds.) ; Mrs. Earle, Sabbath in Puritan New England
(1891) ; Fisher, Men, Women, and Manners in Colonial Times (1898) ; Wendell,
Cotton Mather, the Puritan Priest (1891) ; Allen, Jonathan Edwards (1889) ; and
Eliza Lucas, Journals and Letters (1850), on South Carolina matters.
CHAPTER VIII
THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE
WHEN the British government was about to make peace with
France in 1763, it was suggested that the French hold Canada as a
restraint on the colonies. The suggestion brought forth
a pamphlet from Franklin in which he said the colonies
would not desire independence if they were treated fairly.
Pitt accepted his argument but was out of office before the treaty
was concluded. Bute, his successor, grasped at Canada, but forgot
all about Franklin's stipulation that the colonies be treated fairly.
In fact, if we interpret his policy in the way which seems most justi-
fiable, he was bent on holding Canada and making British authority
sufficiently energetic to deal with whatever spirit of self-assertion
America might manifest. He meant that the colonies should con-
tribute to the commercial support of England, that the king's
prerogative should have ample scope in colonial administration, and
that parliament should exercise the right to lay taxes on the colonists.
That the colonists should consider this treatment fair was impossible ;
that they should find legal arguments in opposition to it was natural.
Had the British government been in the hands of wise and well-
informed men, the crisis of 1763-1776 might have been avoided, which
does not, however, mean that it would not have come later.
But the government acted on a basis of strict legality. It was
legal for parliament to legislate in any way it saw fit ; it was legal
for the crown to exercise its prerogative in the veto of
laws ; it was legal for the royal governors to interfere in J^J ^*S1_S
many ways with the growth of colonial self-government ; £sh Policy",
and finally it was legal for England to impose the navi-
gation laws on the colonies and to exploit the children's labor for
maternal prosperity. These things had been done until they had
all the sanction of precedent. Moreover, the Englishman thought
them reasonable. Of all the moderns he is least liable to take other
people into consideration. A few statesmen have proved an excep-
tion to this rule, but George III, Lord Bute, and the existing cabinet
were not of the number. Those who directed English colonial affairs
in 1763 knew little of that better art of government by which the
mind of the governed is as much respected as the interests of the
governing class.
M 161
162 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
The colonies were developing rapidly in numbers and in ideals.
In twenty-five years the population had doubled, and with greater
strength came greater confidence in the future ; and they naturally
felt disposed to demand a clearer definition of their relation to the
British government. This was difficult because of two apparently
conflicting principles which had hitherto been considered binding.
One was that the colonists had all the fundamental rights of English-
men. Under this they believed themselves entitled to the benefits
of Magna Charta, the Habeas Corpus Acts, and such
Two Con- other great statements of personal liberty as the Bill of
Principles. Rights of 1689. There was no disposition in England
to deny this claim in its abstract form, but the applica-
tion given it by the Americans was disputed. From English expe-
rience the colonists also deduced the clear right of " no taxation without
representation," a principle at the bottom of every great English
reform of the preceding two centuries. The other principle related
to the power of parliament to legislate for the colonies. From time
immemorial Englishmen have held parliament absolute in regard
to the scope of its authority. No colonial charter ever dealt with
the matter explicitly; but in most of them the assembly was given
the right to make such laws as did not conflict with the laws of England.
It had come about that the assemblies dealt with local matters and
had nothing to do with affairs involving the empire, such as external
commerce, the regulation of money, and the collection of debts due
to British subjects. To see that this principle was not violated, the
king insisted on the right to veto colonial statutes, although
raruiandhT *n England his veto of an act of parliament was long
the Colonies smce abandoned. The colonists could not but look on
this as a wrong. Their own view of their rights was that
a colonial assembly was in a small way another parliament, guardian
of popular rights and liberties, and ruling its colony as formerly the
Scottish parliament ruled Scotland under British supervision. They
did not in general dispute the authority of parliament to legislate for
the colonies ; but they resented the exercise of the right in a very
vital way. Never did a more perplexing problem of imperial
federation and home rule arise in British political history; and
in 1763 England was not ready for it.
GRENVILLE'S POLICY
The men into whose hands the problem fell were George III and
George Grenville. The former had been three years king, and had
r just got the reins of government firmly in his hands.
The power of Newcastle and Pitt displeased him, and
he drove them out of office by combining under his patronage all who
had a grudge against either. The war was popular with the country
GRENVILLE'S POLICY 163
and enhanced Pitt's influence with the people. The king, therefore,
hastened to make a peace which many Englishmen regarded as a
sacrifice of national interests. The obloquy of it fell on Bute, the
tool who formulated the terms of peace, and he was forced out of
office. But George III would yield nothing to the old whig party.
He made Grenville prime minister, and by favor and flattery consoli-
dated a parliamentary majority in his support. From that time his
purpose was to rule England. He knew little of the colonies and would
not have distressed them capriciously. But his love of prerogative
was a ruling passion, and once it was questioned by the Americans,
his stubborn nature would risk much in its support.
Walpole and Newcastle had paid little attention to the colonies;
Grenville, more conscientious and more given to detail, not only gave
them attention, but prepared a definite scheme involving Grenville
their relation to the empire. The national debt was exorbi-
tant, 140,000,000 pounds, and much of it grew out of the late war,
fought in behalf of the colonies. To protect the empire a large fleet
and a standing army were necessary. To Grenville, logical and prosaic
statesman, it seemed the most natural of conclusions that the colonies,
a part of the empire, should share this imperial burden. He did not
think of the practical difficulties before him, nor did he stop to look
at the matter from the colonists' standpoint. His conclusion was
made, and three measures were devised to carry it into effect. The
situation was well summed up in the remark of a treasury official that,
"Grenville lost America because he read the American dispatches,
which none of his predecessors had done."
The first of these three momentous acts provided for the strict
enforcement of the navigation and customs laws in America. On
examination Grenville learned that the duties paid in
America did not exceed 2000 pounds a year, and that it J^^^* J0
cost nearly 8000 pounds a year to collect this sum. Smug- be Enforced,
gling existed on a large scale, and he proposed to break
it up. Ships-of-war were sent to patrol the American coasts, rigid
instructions were given to the resident customs officials, and delin-
quents in office were replaced by men who seemed more trustworthy.
In 1764 the "molasses act" of 1733, which had been generally violated
with the connivance of the government, was revived and enlarged
by the addition of coffee, Spanish and Portuguese wines, and several
other less important articles. Thus on the chief articles which
New England received in return for her fish, lumber, staves, and
food products sold in French and Spanish colonies, such duties must
be paid as would practically annihilate the trade. The effects of
this would be more far-reaching than Grenville could have known.
Besides furs, New England and the middle colonies exported little
to England, which did not take their flour, lumber, staves, and cheaper
fish ; and yet they bought English merchandise heavily. As a result,
164 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
there was a large annual balance against them for which they paid
from the cash proceeds of the trade to the islands. Take from them
the French and Spanish parts of this trade, and not only would colonial
industry suffer, but English merchants would find American orders
restricted and American merchants would be hopelessly involved
in debts to their British creditors. The act of 1764, therefore, with
the stricter revenue regulations accompanying it, brought consterna-
tion not only to the smugglers but to all the colonial merchants.
The second measure concerned an army. Grenville decided to
maintain 10,000 men in the American colonies and announced that the
duties arising from the act just mentioned would defray
one-tm'rd of. the expense. The other two- thirds he would
America. ^ave ^e king Pav- This measure was justified on the
ground that the troops were needed to defend the colonies
against foreign attack. To the Americans it seemed that the soldiers
were designed to overawe them, to support the collection of customs,
and to nip in the bud any plans which might be made to support
the colonies in their contention for what they considered their rights.
And they asked with much pertinence why, if protection were needed,
it had not been sent earlier, when French and Indians were a real
menace? To this question no satisfactory answer has been given
by those who see in Grenville's second measure merely a precaution
against foreign dangers.
The third measure was a stamp act. It was not offered in 1764,
but Grenville introduced, and parliament passed, a resolution declaring
that it might be proper to enact it. A protest came at
Stam CAct once from every colonial agent in London, to which Gren-
ville replied by saying that the colonies must assume a
part of the military burden, that a stamp tax was easily laid and
collected, but that he would be pleased to consider any better scheme
of raising the money if the colonies would suggest it. He intimated
that by seizing this opportunity the colonists might make a precedent
for giving money to the crown only when previously consulted by
the ministry. A little reflection showed that this was impracticable
unless the colonies should first adopt some satisfactory form of
authoritative cooperation in apportioning their respective shares of
a contribution and in devising the means of raising the funds.
News of Grenville's measures aroused the apprehension of all the
colonists, but it created consternation among the traders of New
England. A Boston town meeting declared: " There is
no room for further delaY- • • • These unexpected pro-
ceedings may be preparatory to new taxations upon us ;
for if our trade may be taxed, why not our lands? Why not the
produce of our lands, and everything else we possess ? " In this way the
commercial class endeavored to make the rural classes see that the
cause of one was the cause of all It was a peculiarly opportune
POSITION OF THE COLONISTS 165
time for such agitation ; for New England was then in commotion
over a proposition, urged by the Anglicans in England and in the
colonies, for the creation of an American bishopric. Such a step
could not but strengthen the position of that church, lead to the
enlargement of its membership, and promote its wider
influence in political affairs. New England was especially
opposed to such a step, her ministers, the most influential
class of her people, were debating the question in every town, and
to the alarms they thus felt was now added the feeling that parlia-
ment was asserting the right to tax Americans at will. The fact
that Grenville's policy bore more hardly on New England than on
other sections may explain why it was that the first steps of the
revolution were taken by her people.
In July, 1764, was published in Boston James Otis's "Rights of
the British Colonists Asserted and Proved." The author was the
most advanced of what was to become the revolutionary
group, and his pamphlet may be taken as a statement of
the constitutional views of the most extreme Americans. Americans
In it is no advocacy of independence. Could the colonists
choose, he said, they would prefer the status of British subjects to
independence, unless the former condition involved absolute slavery
to England. The right of parliament to make laws for the
general good of the colonies was admitted, but' to allow it the right
to tax American trade was to say it might tax any form of American
property. In England a distinction had been made between "external "
and "internal" taxes: Otis rejected the distinction, saying taxes
were taxes, wherever collected. For remedy he suggested that the
colonies should have representation in parliament "in some proportion
to their number and estates." Already the cry had been raised,
"Taxation without representation is tyranny."
Two objections may be made to these arguments. One is that
they were always overstated. The patriots talked about "British
tyranny," and declared that they were about to be "re-
duced from the character of free subjects to the miserable
state of tributary slaves." Such lurid phrases must
have been unconvincing to the British ministry, on whose good will
depended an exit from the existing confusions. Moreover, these
arguments lacked that self-restrained dignity which thoughtful
men admire. The cause of the patriots was a good one. The rela-
tion of the colonies to England was threatened with a precedent
full of possible future calamity, but it was not likely to be removed
by calling names. The second objection is that the suggestion of
colonial representation was impractical. If it had been adopted,
the Americans would have had very little influence in parliament,
and they could not have prevented taxation of the colonies. This
was so apparent that the demand was soon dropped by the Americans.
i66 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
By the spring of 1765 Grenville knew the views of the colonists
on a stamp tax. Instead of suggesting any other method of contrib-
uting to the burden of empire they had given unmis-
ActPaMed takable evidence of repudiation of all British taxes.
I76s> ' Determined to have the revenue, which he thought essen-
tially just, he now brought in the stamp act, and like the
revised "molasses act" of 1764, it passed parliament without serious
challenge. It required stamps on all legal and commercial documents,
bonds, insurance policies, and newspapers, the proceeds to be expended
exclusively on the colonies. Offenses against the act were to be tried
by admiralty courts in America or in England, and Grenville proposed
to appoint only Americans as agents to distribute the stamps. He
wished to soften the execution of the law as much as possible, and he
thought the colonists would accept it calmly after a brief state of
irritation.
When news of these proceedings came to America there was a
storm of protests. The memorials of colonial assemblies to parlia-
. ment were not received by it, the vote in the House of
in America! Lords was unanimous for the tax, and in the commons
it was 205 to 49. Truly it seemed that the wishes of the
children were despised by the mother. One notable speech had been
made against the bill in the commons by Colonel Isaac Barre, who
fervently praised the Americans as "Sons of Liberty." The phrase
was taken up in America, and bands of "Sons of Liberty" were soon
organized to express the popular disapproval.
But the outburst did not come at once. For some weeks after the
act was known to have passed there was a stupefied feeling of outrage,
but no one suggested a means of action. The man who
Henrys to°^ tne m^iatiye m protest was Patrick Henry, a Vir-
Resokitions. gmia lawyer of Scotch ancestry, who in 1763 had made
himself the popular hero in a Presbyterian community
by his wonderful speech in the celebrated "Parson's cause." He
was now a member of the Virginia house of burgesses, but was dis-
trusted for his extreme views by the old and experienced leaders of
the body. To the consternation of the latter, he introduced resolu-
tions condemnatory of the stamp act, in which he claimed for Virginians
the exclusive right of taxing themselves in their own assembly. The
leaders of the aristocratic East had hitherto been masters of the house,
and they considered the young backwoodsman's resolutions too
extreme. After a hot debate he carried the day by a close majority.
It was here that he made the famous utterance : "Tarquin and Caesar
each had his Brutus ; Charles the First his Cromwell ; and George
the Third" - [from the speaker and others, "Treason ! Treason !"]
— "may profit by their example. If this be treason, make the most
of it." Haying won the victory, Henry departed for his home, and
his opponents, taking advantage of his absence, carried a motion-
THE STAMP ACT OPPOSED 167
to expunge the most significant words of his resolutions. But the
effect was not what they intended. Henry's words had aroused
Virginia, and his original resolutions were printed everywhere and no
notice taken of the expunging action of the conservatives. Henry
became a conspicuous leader in the struggle then beginning. As
governor of the state and as counsellor among the revolutionists
his work was hardly more than ordinary, but in the task of arousing
public sentiment by means of burning and exaggerated descriptions
of colonial wrongs he was unequalled in the South. James Otis,
of Boston, was his counterpart in the North. Each played his part
in the drama about to open.
The popular indignation was general, and associations of "Sons
of Liberty" were formed in every colony. They found leaders as
fervent as Henry and Otis, intimidated the stamp agents,
and forced them to resign, in many places employing
violence. In Boston the moo destroyed a building which
they thought was to be the stamp office, and pillaged and wrecked
the residence of Chief Justice Hutchinson. Defenders of the crown
were now denounced as "tories" while friends of the colonies were
called "whigs." But the "Sons of Liberty" were only a part of the
whigs ; for there were in America many conservatives who opposed
taxation by parliament but who did not participate in the demon-
strations of the radicals. At this time no one openly advocated
independence.
The hope of the conservatives was in appeal to the crown, and for
that purpose, at the suggestion of Massachusetts, the Stamp Act
congress met at New York, October 7, 1765. Delegates
came from all the colonies but New Hampshire, Virginia,
North Carolina, and Georgia, and from these came
unofficial messages of encouragement. The result was
petitions to king and parliament and a declaration of the rights of
Americans. In the latter we have the first statement of a purpose
common to all the colonies. The congress repudiated the notion
that the colonies should have parliamentary representation as impos-
sible "from local circumstances," and it admitted the right of parlia-
ment to make general and trade laws in reference to the colonies,
but denied its authority to lay taxes. The right of taxation, said the
delegates, was a sacred right of Englishmen, guaranteed to all the
colonists in their charters, and on it they stood. After the congress
adjourned committees of correspondence, formed as an afterthought
through the suggestion of New York whigs, took up the
question of trade reprisal. Thus were made non-impor-
tation and non-consumption agreements, which secured
wide acceptance by the people. "Touching the pocket nerve,"
as this course was called, was sensibly felt by the British merchants,
who signed many memorials for the repeal of the stamp act.
i68 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
The state of affairs in America was well known in England when
parliament met, December 17, 1765, and it was evident that the
objectionable measure must be executed by force or
tht/stam repealed. For the former course neither king nor people
Ac* ' were ready. The latter was made easier by the recent
retirement of the Grenville ministry for causes not
connected with its colonial policy. The first sign of retraction was
when inquiry was made to know if the colonies would be satisfied
if the stamp act were " moderated." Franklin, agent for Penn-
sylvania, was interrogated on this point at the bar of the house of
commons, and declared that nothing but absolute repeal would be
accepted by the colonies. Asked if there were no means by which
they would erase their resolutions against parliamentary taxation,
he answered, "None that I know of; they will never do it unless
compelled by force of arms." Pitt, who was ill when the act passed,
now took the floor for repeal. Twitted by Grenville for encouraging
the Americans to defy England, he exclaimed : "I rejoice that America
has resisted. Three millions of people so dead to all the feelings
of liberty, as voluntarily to submit to be slaves, would have been
fit instruments to make slaves of the rest." He urged the repeal
of the stamp act, but favored a strong assertion of the authority of
parliament to "bind their trade, confine their manufactures, and
exercise every power whatsoever, except that of taking their money
out of their pockets without their consent." The outcome was that
March 18 a repeal bill was signed by the king. At the same time
passed the "declaratory act," an explicit statement that parliament
could rightfully make laws for "the colonies and people of America,
subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever"
In America a few stamps had been sold in South Carolina and
Georgia : in all the other colonies the law was not executed in the
four and a half months it was formally in force. November
Stamp Act a I? the day set for the beginning of its enforcement, was
before its*6* usnere(i m with the tolling of bells, and processions marched
Repeal. through the chief towns to bury or burn the stamp act.
In Connecticut the stamps themselves were seized and
burned. In North Carolina the governor found his house surrounded
by more than 700 Sons of Liberty, who did not go away until the
stamp agent resigned and with other officers swore not to attempt
to enforce the odious act. When this situation began, business
came to a standstill. No one dared accept an unstamped instrument,
and no ship could get stamped clearance papers. But with the
triumph of the protestants courage came to the timid ones and business
went on as before in disregard of the stamp act.
From such confusions the colonies were thrown into joy by the
news of repeal. The bells now rang another tune, liberty poles
were erected, and the health of the king was drunk in every kind
THE HAND OF TOWNSHEND 169
of tipple from the rum of the laboring man to the punch and Madeira
of the wealthy merchant. Virginia ordered a statue of the king
and New York ordered statues of both the king and
Pitt. In Philadelphia the substantial citizens gave their
homespun clothes to the poor and appeared in handsome
suits of British cloth. In their excitement the colonists thought
little of the declaratory act, the Sons of Liberty dissolved as a
society, and every thought of resisting the mother country dis-
appeared.
GROWING IRRITATION
Popular rejoicings did not last long ; for spite of the repeal of the
stamp act the colonists and the king were wide apart in principle.
In New York was a large detachment of regulars who
by a parliamentary billeting act of 1765 were to be fur-
nished with quarters by the colony. When the matter
was laid before the assembly a partial refusal was obtained and trouble
began, with the result that in 1767 the assembly was suspended until
it complied with the law. In Massachusetts the governor blundered
into a quarrel when he demanded of the assembly compensation
for the sufferers through the stamp act riots. Objection was made
to the demand, as well as to a call for supplies for the garrison under
the billeting act. Next the governor vetoed the election of James
Otis as speaker of the assembly. There was much bickering, but a
compromise was effected. Old quarrels might have been forgotten
if Charles Townshend had not been at the head of the British ministry.
His first prominent appearance in colonial affairs was in 1763, when
he was first lord of trade in Bute's cabinet. He then formulated
a plan to remodel the colonial government on a uniform scale, to
enforce the acts of trade, and to use the revenue raised in America
to support an army and civil establishment at the will of the crown.
The scheme was more thoroughgoing than that inaugurated by
Grenville, but it passed out of sight with the fall of the Bute ministry.
Townshend did not forget it, and when through the fall of the
Rockingham ministry in 1766 he became head of the exchequer
he returned to his older policy. Without the support
of his colleagues in the cabinet he announced that he
would bring in a bill to raise in the colonies the money
to support an army in America, a bill, he said, which
would have the approval of the Americans themselves. Had the
cabinet been a strong one, he would probably have been forced to
resign ; but Pitt, now Earl of Chatham, was ill, and Grafton, the
nominal head, was weak-willed, and Townshend was allowed to pro-
ceed in the course he mapped out. In May, 1767, he secured the
passage of three acts relating to America. In one, duties were laid on
tea, glass, red and white lead, and paper. The colonists had admitted
170 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
the legality of external taxes, and such was the kind now laid. But
as the revenue from the five articles named would not be more than
£40,000, this act was inadequate to the support of an army, for which
ten times that much was necessary. It was designed, it seems, for
a precedent, to be followed by a much wider list of taxable articles.
To secure larger revenues immediately he carried through a law
creating a board of commissioners to supervise the execution of the
navigation acts in America ; and as this would likely lead to commo-
tions, he got a third bill passed as a warning to any colony which
disputed the parliamentary act to billet soldiers. It suspended the
New York assembly for its recent refusal to furnish supplies at the
demand of the governor. The blow fell heavily on that province,
in which were many tories, and in 1769 the assembly yielded and was
restored to full vigor. The Townshend acts were carried through
parliament without serious difficulty. The landed interest controlled
both houses and were pleased to throw off their own shoulders any
part of the heavy burden of taxation. To them the colonies seemed
ungrateful and rebellious children, for whom a little parental sternness
would be good. The king fully approved the sentiment. Recalling
now the prophecy of 1762 it seems well to say that England lost the
colonies, not because Canada was no longer French, but because
the mother country thought that the time was come to take them
into a stricter control than had hitherto been exercised over them.
Whatever might have happened later, the American revolution came,
when it did come, as the result of events which England, and not the
colonies, initiated.
The colony most affected by trade restrictions was Massachusetts,
and she was the first to move in protest. The assembly had a good
leader in Samuel Adams, who was the author of several
Protests protests of the assembly to king and parliament. He
also wrote a circular letter which the assembly sent to
the other colonies, suggesting that cooperation was essential in a
cause that touched all the continent. Most of the colonies revived
the non-importation agreement; but the state of feeling
Differed from that of 1765 in that it was less vociferous.
Dickinson. There were no riots, and the conservative whigs played
a larger part. This feeling was well expressed by John
Dickinson, of Pennsylvania, in his "Farmer's Letters." He declared
that a most serious crisis was on the country and urged that it be
met in the spirit of prudence, bravery, and magnanimity. He
set aside all thought of independence, saying, "Let us behave like
dutiful children, who have received unmerited blows from a beloved
parent." But he asserted that if England could tax American im-
ports, she could tax in a prohibitive way the articles she did not wish
the colonists to manufacture, and that done, he concluded, "the
tragedy of American liberty is finished." From 1767 we hear little
RESISTANCE IN MASSACHUSETTS 17 r
in America about the difference between "external" and "internal"
taxes. Indeed, it was now freely asserted that England had no
right to "legislate" for the colonies.
Townshend died September 4, 1767, Lord North succeeded him
as head of the exchequer, and Lord Hillsborough became secretary
for the colonies, a new office of cabinet rank; but the
Townshend policy was not to be relaxed. When Hills-
borough saw the Massachusetts circular to the other col-
onies, he pronounced it seditious, and ordered the individ-
ual governors to adjourn their respective assemblies, if notice was
taken of it. To Governor Bernard, of Massachusetts, he sent a
demand that the assembly should revoke the circular. In a secret
session, by a vote of 92 to 17, the demand was refused, and an
address was sent to Hillsborough in which it was said that the colony
stood on the principles of the English revolution of 1689. All the
colonies were now keenly alive to the situation, and Virginia, the
oldest and largest, took a determined position by the side of the
trading colonies of the North. When parliament knew of this it
passed resolutions of censure on Massachusetts and suggested that
the leaders of the whigs in America be sent to England for trial
under an obsolete law of Henry VIII's reign. This suggestion
brought out a protest from every colony. From this time the con-
troversy was probably beyond the possibility of compromise, although
there remained in America many who still hoped England would yield.
Meanwhile the spirit of mob violence reappeared, its first out-
break being in Boston, where it was impossible to enforce the revenue
acts. In 1768, for example, a cargo of wine was landed
without paying duty and carried boldly through the
streets under a guard of "stout fellows, armed with
bludgeons," and the revenue officials were not rash enough to attempt
a seizure. On the contrary, they asked that troops be sent to the
town. The request was reasonable from the British point of view ;
if the laws existed, they should be executed. So thought the govern-
ment, and in September two regiments with artillery, about 1000
men in all, landed in Boston. The people refused to submit to the
billeting law on the ground that there was room for the troops in the
barracks at Castle William. General Gage, commander-in- chief
in the colonies, protested, but the soldiers had eventually to be placed
in buildings hired at dear rentals. They had come to intimidate the
town, and between them and the inhabitants relations were unpleasant
from the beginning.
For eighteen months officers and soldiers avoided serious conflict.
They were criticized in the journals, flouted in the streets,
and sometimes involved in personal conflict with the more Resentment
violent townsmen. Nor were they always patient and
considerate of the people. They raced horses on Sundays, played
172 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
unseemly music near the meetinghouses during divine worship, and
planted cannon to command the state house, in which the general
court sat. In 1769 Otis was attacked by a revenue commissioner
for an article in a newspaper and received a sword cut, from which he
sank into insanity. Though the troops had nothing to do with the
outrage, it produced high popular resentment for every British agent.
Early in 1770 violent affrays became numerous. It is evident
that the long residence of the soldiers in the town had given the
more radical leaders a text for agitation, and it may
kiBOTtond ke tnat tne P°Pulace had reacned a point of excitement
1770 ' beyond the control of the leaders. In February a wooden
image appeared over the door of a shop whose keeper
flouted non-importation, and a mob interfered when a friend tried
to remove it. Thereupon the friend fired into the crowd, killing a
boy. At the victim's funeral 500 children walked in front of the
remains and 1300 persons followed them to the grave. Such an
outburst of sympathy shows how well the whig side was controlled
by its leaders. March 5, 1770, came a more serious affair. Two
soldiers were attacked and beaten by townsmen, and an ugly spirit
was aroused. The bells were rung, a large crowd gathered,
The and a sentinel in front of the customhouse was attacked.
Boston ^ Captain Preston, officer of the day, with thirteen men,
MarchV' went to his support. The mob was not intimidated.
1770. ' They threw snow, shouted vile epithets, and cried: "Fire
if you dare, fire and be damned ! We know you dare
not ! " The soldiers behaved well until one of them, struck with a
stick, discharged his musket without orders. The mob rushed for-
ward to take him, but fell back when several other muskets were
fired. Drums were beat and all the troops in Boston seized arms
to repel a general attack. At this point the governor appeared, and
by his appeals induced the angry citizens to disperse. At the first
shot, Crispus Attucks, a mulatto, was slain, and subsequently four
others were killed and six were wounded. Preston and several of
the soldiers were indicted for murder, John Adams and Josiah Quincy
appearing as their counsel. All were acquitted but two, who, con-
victed of manslaughter, pleaded benefit of clergy and escaped with
branding on the hand. The day after the shooting a town meeting
was held under the leadership of Samuel Adams and John Hancock.
The latter was a rich merchant and many times a smuggler.
Before their determined protest the governor yielded, and the soldiers
were withdrawn from the town. The victims of the " Massacre,"
as the affair was called, were given a public funeral, and for a dozen
years the anniversary of their death was observed in Boston. The
incident, described in a pamphlet as the culminating act of British
tyranny, had a marked influence on all the colonists. It was the kind
of argument that the average citizen could understand.
TAXATION ON PRINCIPLE 173
Meanwhile, events moved rapidly in England. The cabinet,
now headed by Lord North, but delivered hand and foot to the will
of the king, was surprised to find the revenues from
America were only £295 more than the cost of collection T£^xs a
and to learn that extraordinary military expenses there
were £170,000. For these results the government was creating
the spirit of resistance in the colonies ; and although North declared
in parliament that theTownshend acts ought not to be repealed "till
we see America prostrate at our feet," it is certain that he and the
king were anxious to escape from the situation without complete
defeat. It was with this hope in mind that he announced on the day
of the " Boston Massacre," March 5, 1770, a bill to repeal all the duties
imposed by the Townshend acts, save that on tea, which was kept to
maintain the rights of parliament. "The properest time to assert
our right of taxation is when the right is refused," said he with a tone
of confidence which must have been assumed for the occasion. For
to make palatable the tax of threepence a pound he allowed a draw-
back of nearly twelve pence a pound on the tea sent from England to
America ; thus offering cheaper tea to the colonists than to the people
of England. The law passed, and its financial effect was good. Co-
lonial imports from Great Britain, which aggregated £2,378,000 in
1768, and fell to £1,634,000 in 1769, rose to £4,200,000 in 1771. Non-
importation was relaxed on all articles except tea, but public opinion
in regard to that article was expressed in the formation of societies
- to refrain from tea-drinking. The issue between parliament and
the colonies now appeared in a new form: the Grenville plan to
tax America for revenue was given up, and in lieu of it was the king's
plan to tax it on principle.
At this stage we may take a glance at the general situation pro-
duced by seven years of controversy, i. The colonial loyalty of
1763 was gone, and instead were suspicion and bitterness.
2. With it were mingled a feeling of self-confidence and
a conviction that England could not carry out the program
she had undertaken. She had been obliged to confess failure in
regard to the stamp act and the larger part of the Townshend duties ;
and was to see the same result in regard to the tea duties. 3. The
losing controversy provoked a spirit of bitterness between the royal
officials in the colonies and leaders of the people there. The former
felt impelled to assert their rights, and there were numerous incidents
which they took for challenges. The colonials were equally stout-
hearted, and in fiery appeals aroused the people on the one hand while
they awakened the wrath of the officials on the other. Each side
accused the other of usurping authority, and mutual hatred became
strong. 4. The colonial assemblies became the centers of resistance
to the king. Persons who felt otherwise could not be elected to these
bodies; and if any man was disposed to balance between the two
174 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
sides the prospect of defeat by his constituency was apt to make him
decide against the crown, and 5. Colonial politics acquired dignity
and strength from having a great common cause of protest. Hitherto
the contention was about some local matter, as issuing paper money,
or the favoritism of a class, and on such a subject men might divide
in mere factious feeling. But now there was a cause as great as any
that had ever aroused a people. It involved equally the upper and
the lower class ; it appealed alike to the reason and to the highest
emotions ; and it had in it every hope of the future.
In 1770 the colonists were divided into three groups: i. The
tories, out and out prerogative men, who either believed that a
government was strongest when ruled by the crown or
Three w^o founcj it their interest to say so. In this party were
America?1 those who derived advantage from royal favor, many
others who were conservatives by nature and believed
the militant whigs were irresponsible and led by demagogues. 2.
The whigs, ardently protesting against the plan of king and parlia-
ment to bring America under a stronger British control. Some of
them were undoubtedly now willing to carry resistance to extremities,
but felt it was not wise to say so. Among the leaders were chiefly
those who had hitherto dominated the assemblies. Both inclination
and interest prompted them to their course ; for by establishing the
principle of colonial control of taxation they enhanced the power of
the assembly, which but increased their own influence. Some whig
leaders were accused of demagogy. They organized bands of working
men, whom they harangued most passionately against British des-
potism. Others, and the majority, were, more quiet. There was
always some difficulty in keeping the extremists from going too
fast. 3. A middle class, who considered the defenders of royalty
either selfish or misled, but who looked on the whigs as agitators.
For the most part, they thought more of their personal affairs than
politics. This class was very numerous, especially in the agricultural
sections. The desire to bring them to the support of the revolution
was a wholesome check on the more impetuous whigs.
At this time Massachusetts was most prominent in opposition to
the British policy, and for this Samuel Adams was chiefly responsible.
He was able and persistent, and he lost no opportunity
Adams to aPPea-l to tne people. In 1772 he carried a vote in
a Boston town meeting to create a committee of corre-
spondence to exchange views and information with other towns in
the colony. The other towns accepted the suggestion, and thus
Adams became the head of a colonial organization in the whig cause.
In the following year a group of Virginia whigs, among them Patrick
Henry and Thomas Jefferson, carried a resolution in the assembly
to appoint a committee for Virginia to correspond with committees
of the other colonies in reference to all matters relating to the common
THE BOSTON TEA PARTY 175
good. Rhode Island, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
and South Carolina adopted this suggestion, and thus was created
a central organization in behalf of the continental cause. When
these steps were taken three years had elapsed since North had sub-
stituted the tea tax for the Townshend duties, and although there
had been various irritating occurrences * in the several colonies, there
was nothing to which the colonies could point as an act of aggression
on the part of parliament. Why then should this step toward a
united America have been thought necessary? The answer must
be that the whigs were gaining in power, and themselves becoming
more aggressive. They had ample reason to know that the king and
his officers had not relaxed their purpose to exercise the mastery,
and they were preparing to meet a danger they felt inevitable.
A small incident brought the blow they were expecting. In 1773
the East India Company, which imported England's tea, was in
financial straits, due, it seems, to its inability to sell tea
in the American colonies. It appealed to the government ?hf:E*st
f . . ,. , A. , . India Com-
for a remission of duties. Lord North and the king pany
willingly gave the relief asked for, and the company was now
allowed to send its tea to America without any duty paid in England.
North was asked to give up, also, the duty of threepence a pound
imposed by the act of 1767 ; but he refused, saying the king was
determined to make its collection a test of authority with America.
On this small point, it seems safe to say, hung the question of American
revolt.
The company took the favor granted it, and in 1773 sent to the
colonies a number of ships laden with the tea which for months had
been accumulating in its warehouses. All this was
known in the colonies, and the people were determined T*agoe!
to resist. The whig leaders at once put into operation
their machinery of arousing opinion. The governors and higher
officials who led the tories had no means of checking the whigs, and
the middle group were indifferent. At Charleston the agents of
the company resigned before the popular storm, and as the duty
had not been paid at the end of twenty days the tea was seized by the
collector and stored in damp vaults. Three years Jater it was sold
at auction. In Philadelphia the whig leaders called large popular
1 The most important was the destruction of the Gaspee, a small ship with eight guns
which was very active in arresting smugglers in Rhode Island. The commander was ap-
plauded by his superiors for his zeal, and became overconfident. He went so far as to send
some of the seized property to Boston for adjudication, alleging, with probable truth, that
justice would not be obtained in Rhode Island. He became very unpopular in this colony,
and when, on June 9, 1772, his ship ran aground near Providence, a group of citizens
attacked it, wounded the commander, overpowered the crew, and burned the hated craft.
The party were well known by common report, but when a commission appeared to in-
quire into the outrage no evidence could be had. The incident promoted colonial defiance
and strengthened the conviction of the British government that the supreme problem ia
the colonies was to teach the olonists to rjspect authority.
i76 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
meetings which denounced the tea tax. Here, as in New York, the
agents declined to act, and the cargoes went back in the ships which
brought them. In Boston excitement was high. The agents, two
of whom were sons of Governor Hutchinson, refused to resign, and
took refuge in the castle. When the captains of the tea ships wished
to go back to England with their cargoes, the governor forbade their
departure. He seemed determined to force the issue
"Boston ^ t0 a settlement, and Adams met it squarely. On the
Dec1!^' night of December 16, 1773, about fifty men disguised
I773'. ' as Indians and directed by Adams himself went aboard
the ships at the wharf and emptied 342 chests of tea into
the water. No effort was made by the town officials to prevent this
affair, nor were any of the participants prosecuted for destroying
property. This act of violence is to be defended only on the ground
that Adams and his associates considered war inevitable and looked
upon themselves as its heralds.
CONTINENTAL ORGANIZATION AND ATTEMPTS AT ADJUSTMENT
While the news of the "Boston Tea Party" was fresh in England,
parliament came together, March 7, 1774. The king was determined
that Boston should be made to respect his power and lost
The Colo- no time in calling to the attention of the lawmakers the
ObeVthe8* state of affairs in America. With the majority the only
Laws. question was to make authority respected, and though
Chatham in one house and Burke in the other pleaded for a
restoration of the laws to the state they were in before Grenville, a
policy of coercion was adopted. It was stated in five acts, the sub-
stance of which was as follows :
1. The port of Boston was closed, the customhouse was moved to
Salem, and ships were stationed in the harbor to enforce the law.
The ban was to be removed by the king when compensa-
BostonPort tjQn was ma(je for the tea destroyed and when he was
satisfied that the duties would be paid in the future.
2. The charter of Massachusetts was remodeled so as to remove
several of its liberal features. Councillors, who had hitherto been
chosen by the assembly, were now to be appointed by the
The Massa- crown< All the minor executive and judicial officers were
Charter! also to be appointed, and not elected, as formerly ; and
the town meeting was not to meet, except for elections,
without the consent of the governor, who must specifically authorize
the kind of business that could be transacted. Lawyers were then
divided on the question of the authority of parliament to annul
or amend a colonial charter; but so good an authority as Chief
Justice Mansfield supported the right. He proceeded on the theory
that the English parliament may do anything but a physical impossi-
RETALIATORY LAWS 177
bility. But granted this be true, what shall we say of the political
wisdom of the men who thus jauntily tried to uproot a form of govern-
ment which had developed through a century and a half? Could
they have expected any other answer than resistance ? From being a
home of democracy Massachusetts was now to be a centralized prov-
ince, with no other feature of popular government than the right to
choose the members of the lower house.
3. To secure a fair trial for officials charged with capital crimes
while executing their duties, the governor might, if he saw fit, send
them to England for a hearing. In such a case he must
send witnesses. The law seems to have been suggested
by the trial of Preston and the soldiers concerned in the
Boston " Massacre."
4. The law of 1765 to authorize quartering troops had been al-
lowed to expire ; but it was now revived. It was omi-
nous, also, that General Gage, commander of troops in in ^*t c
America, was made governor of Massachusetts.
5. The domain ceded by France in 1763 wa"s organized into
a province of Quebec, governed by a legislative council appointed
by the crown, with the Catholic Church established by law, and with
limits including the region between the Ohio and the lakes. The
The act was the result of a long investigation by English " Quebec
officials and lawyers, and plausible reasons not connected Act-"
with the seaboard situation are assigned for its important features.
But it came at an inopportune moment. Virginia, New York, Con-
necticut, and Massachusetts claimed territory in the Northwest and
resented the loss of it. To all the whigs it seemed that England wished
to build up beyond the mountains a great power dependent on the St.
Lawrence and lake systems of transportation, with a government
highly centralized and held firmly in hand by the crown, and with an
established religion which would preclude any sympathy with the
Atlantic colonies. Recent investigations have shown that these as-
sumptions were unwarranted. The Northwest was attached to
Canada, it is said, for the better regulation of the fur trade, and the
government and religion established in the province were necessarily
adopted for a population mostly French Catholic and accustomed to
the French regime. The seaboard colonies knew nothing of this. Had
they known, the " Quebec act" must have aroused their apprehension.
From early days they had dreamed of the time when they should sub-
due the wilderness as far as the Mississippi. It now seemed evident
that the dream was shattered, for whatever the motive of the govern-
ment the Northwest was to be closed to the Atlantic colonies by being
handed over to a people peculiarly dependent on the crown and largely
alien in political and religious sentiment.
The acts of 1774 brought consternation to the colonists, for they
left no choice between resistance and submission. June i, Boston was
I y8 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
blockaded, no goods might go out or come in, business stood still,
and want invaded the homes of the poor. May 13 General
Punished. Gage arrived with four regiments, and assumed the duties
of military governor. It was expected that the town
would soon be forced into submission and the other colonies be over-
awed by the fate of Massachusetts.
But there was little thought of submission. From the neighboring
towns and from the remotest colonies came relief for Boston's poor.
A shower of pamphlets appeared in every quarter arguing
Elsewhere. tnat tne cause of Massachusetts was the cause of all the
colonies. So threatening became the situation that Gage
fortified the neck of land then joining the town to the mainland, and
gave up all thoughts of offensive operations against the interior. The
officials appointed under the remodeled charter dared not show them-
selves outside of his lines.
By this time much was being said about a congress representing the
whole continent after the manner of the stamp act congress of 1765.
A Conti- The suggestion was generally approved, and Virginia took
nentai the initiative. In May her burgesses set aside June i , the
Movement. day the Boston Port Bill began to operate, as a day for
fasting and prayer, and for this Governor Dunmore dissolved the
house. Then the members, in a meeting at the famous Raleigh tavern
in Williamsburg, sent out a summons for an annual congress to con-
sider "the united interest of America," and called a Virginia conven-
tion to elect delegates to such a congress. The response was imme-
diate and hearty. In three colonies only, Rhode Island, Massachusetts,
and Pennsylvania, delegates could be chosen by the assembly. Else-
where the royal governor adjourned that body to keep it from acting,
and the people followed Virginia's example of calling a convention on
their own authority. How completely the whigs now controlled
colonial politics is shown by the fact that the personnel of these con-
ventions was usually the same as that of the several assemblies.
When the delegates assembled in Philadelphia, September 5, 1774,
all the colonies were represented but Georgia. They were the best
men among the whigs, all trained by years of leader-
The First snjp m their respective struggles against royal govern-
Congress**1 ors or rival factions. The sessions were secret, but we
1774. " know that two groups appeared among the delegates.
One wished to have a union of the colonies, with a president
appointed by the king and a council of delegates which could make
laws subject to parliamentary veto and which could also veto laws of
parliament relating to the colonies. Had this plan been adopted and
allowed by England the colonies would have remained English. It
was favored by the most conservative, among them Jay,
Duane, Golden, Galloway, and Edward Rutledge. It had
the serious defect that it would most certainly be rejected by the king.
FIRST CONTINENTAL CONGRESS 179
The delegates from Virginia and Massachusetts led the other group.
War alone, it was evident, could shake the will of George III, and if
we must fight, let it be for independence. This was a bold idea and the
supporters of it did not venture to announce it openly. A great many
whigs clung lovingly to the name " Briton," and it was finally de-
cided to publish the American contention to the world and await the
formation of public opinion. Thus it was that the congress took up
the preparation of a series of " Declarations and Resolves." The
differences among the delegates show in the utterance in regard to
legislation. It distinctly claims for the colonies the " exclusive power "
to legislate for their own affairs, subject only to the king's veto, but it
promises acquiescence to parliamentary acts for the bona fide regula-
tion of external commerce and made in the commercial interest of the
empire. As to ordinary rights of person and political liberty the
resolutions were clear and strong. The congress also prepared ad-
dresses to the king, the British nation, and to the people of the
colonies.
The most important action of the congress was the adoption of the
"Association," an agreement to import no English products after
December i, 1774, and to export nothing to any British
port, European or colonial, after September 10, 1775.
This action occasioned serious opposition from New Eng-
land and the middle colonies ; b.ut every section must sacri- tion.
fice something. Virginia gave up the exportation of tobacco
to England, Massachusetts the West India trade, and Rhode Island the
slave trade. The local committees were urged to see that the "As-
sociation" was not violated. They became a very important factor
in the revolutionary movement, administering oaths to those who
seemed of doubtful loyalty, publishing lists of persons who violated
the Association, and in many other ways making life unpleasant for
tories, as all opponents of revolution soon began to be called. The
"Association" was readily ratified by all the colonies but New York,
where there wa§ a strong tory element, and Georgia, which was badly
divided between factions of New England and Southern origin. But
in both these colonies the whigs were numerous and organized local
committees to promote the colonial cause.
October 26 congress dissolved, ordering a new congress to meet
May 10, 1775, unless the grievances of the colonies were previously
redressed. Its chief significance was that it gave cohesion
to the whigs. They had come to understand one another. ^at ^
Their appeals discountenanced independence, but advised signified5,
that the people be ready for the worst. At the same time
the country was full of warlike preparations. Arms were bought
and military companies were formed. Provincial congresses and com-
mittees of safety gave the revolutionary movement an efficient or-
ganization. The royal governors reported to the home government
i8o THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
all that happened, but they were powerless to arrest the preparations
which led daily toward revolution.
Gage, behind his Boston barrier, watched anxiously the gathering
storm in Massachusetts. Reliable information convinced him that the
advent of spring, 1775, would make his task a difficult
an?Ccmcord. one> ^° anticipate his opponents seemed good policy,
' and on the evening of April 18 he sent 800 men to seize
some stores at Concord, 18 miles away. The whigs were on the watch,
and sent messengers to arouse the countryside. A lantern in the tower
of the North church flashed information of the departure to Paul
Revere, on the other side of Charles river, who rode hastily to Lexing-
ton. Signal guns and galloping horses soon told the regulars that their
movements were known. On Lexington common at dawn they en-
countered sixty minute men in military line, who refused to disperse.
Suddenly there was a single shot, and then a volley, before which the
militiamen fled, eight killed and ten wounded. The British lost none,
and proceeded to Concord, where they destroyed such stores as the
natives, warned of the movement, had not carried away. By this
time the countryside swarmed with militia, and the British hastily
retreated. Every rock, tree, or fence that offered cover concealed
angry Americans from whose fire the regulars suffered severely.
Gage, informed of the situation, sent Percy with 1500 fresh troops to
escort the column to safety. By this means it came back to Boston,
but with a loss of 273 killed, wounded, and missing. The militia lost
93 in all, and following the retreating column in force began the siege
of Boston.
The news from Lexington and Concord flew rapidly southward. In
five days it reached Philadelphia, six days later it reached Virginia,
and May 4 it was at Edenton, North Carolina. Every-
The Meek- wnere jt brought forth patriotic resolves and preparations
Resolves. ^or war- -^ts most outspoken reception was in Mecklen-
burg county, North Carolina, the center of a large Scotch-
Irish population. Here on May 31, the militia companies being met
for their muster, a series of resolutions was passed, declaring the com-
missions of civil and military officers null and void, and appointing a
method of local government "until laws shall be provided for us by
Congress." A copy of these resolutions was sent to England, where
it is preserved, and they were also printed in a Charleston news-
paper. The original was destroyed by fire, and being rewritten from
memory survived in a form resembling the national declaration of in-
dependence. Many people have taken this paper, whose date, May
20, is supposed to be accounted for by the difference between new
and old chronology, for the resolutions actually passed on May 31.
This "Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence" is not supported
by reliable contemporary evidence, and is now rejected by the best
historians.
BATTLE OF BUNKER HILL
181
Continental
Congress,
1775-
PROSPECT
COBBL
May 10, 1775, the second continental congress assembled in Phila-
delphia. Events in Massachusetts filled every heart with dismay, and
preparations were made for war. The New England
volunteers, which had been called out to the number of
20,000, were taken into the pay of congress, and Washing-
ton was appointed to the command. But still the con-
servatives hesitated to declare for independence, and to
preserve harmony the advanced wing consented to defer that step.
All united in a declaration of " the Causes and Necessity for taking up
Arms, " and made a last address to the king. The march of events was
bringing the colonies inevitably to separation from England, and the
progressives could afford to wait.
In this sense nothing could have been more propitious than the
progress of the siege of Boston, where Gage, with more than 6000 men,
was held in close lines. His position was insecure by reason
of high ground behind Charlestown on the north and be-
hind Dorchester on the south. If either place were fortified, his own
position would be untenable. On the night of June- 16 the Ameri-
cans attempted to secure
the former position, and
for that purpose Colonel
Prescott occupied Breed's
Hill, constructing re-
doubts, at which the
British opened fire from
fleet and batteries early
on the 1 7th. Prescott
held his position, and
throughout the morning
groups of colonials came
to his support. Gage saw
this, and sent General
Sir William Howe with a
strong attacking column
to carry the redoubts
in front. Breed's Hill, like the adjacent Bunker Hill, which gave
name to the battle, is on a peninsula whose upper part, a narrow plain,
was commanded by the fleet. Had Howe taken this point and fortified
it, the Americans must have hastened from their position or been
starved into surrender. But neither Howe nor Gage had respect for
the fighting qualities of their foes, and for their rashness paid dearly.
It was in the afternoon when the regulars landed and slowly formed
their lines along the shore. Prescott, following the best tradition of
the American frontiersmen, ordered his men not to fire "until you see
the whites of their eyes." At close range they delivered such deadly
volleys that the attacking column recoiled, and fell back with great
BUNKER H:
AND
BOSTON
B.iCo..N.T.
i82 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
loss. Rallied again, they again were driven back. A third time they
approached the crest, now supported by a body of marines, and mov-
ing carefully. At first the Americans fired effectively, and then, to
the surprise of Howe, their fire ceased and they retired from the field.
Their ammunition was exhausted, and they had no bayonets to with-
stand a charge. The British took possession of the crest, having lost
over 1000 killed and wounded. The American loss was 441, and
General Nathanael Greene remarked, "I wish we could sell them
another hill at the same price." This engagement was considered a
brilliant victory by the Americans, and after it the revolutionary war
was inevitable.
Washington, commander-in-chief, arrived in Cambridge July 2.
The army was in confusion, supplies were lacking, enthusiasm was
cooling, and many of the men were going home at the
expiration of their terms of service. Had Howe, who
mand. succeeded Gage in command, attacked vigorously, the
Americans must have given way. Washington's presence
worked a change. He was a man to be respected ; order reappeared,
recruits came in, and the army recovered spirits. Supplies came from
an unexpected source. Ethan Allen, of Vermont, acting on his own
authority, raised a force of "Green Mountain Boys," surprised and
captured Ticonderoga and Crown Point, after which Fort
Allen11 St J°.hn felL At these Points the British had left large
quantities of guns and ammunition, which now proved very
helpful to the Americans. Especially useful were the cannon, which
were carried to Boston over the snow. Other important assistance
came from an improvised fleet, one ship of which, the Lee, commanded
by John Manley, took an ordnance brig with 2000 muskets with bay-
onets and a large store of ball and powder.
Thus provided, Washington, in the spring of 1776, determined to
force the siege tp an end. March 4 he seized Dorchester Heights and
placed cannon there. Howe sought to drive him away,
Evacuated ^ut a st°rm luckily kept the British for several days from
crossing the harbor, and when it subsided the Heights
were too strong to be taken. Boston and the fleet were now at the
mercy of the American guns, and Howe agreed to go away and leave
the city without further damage if he was not molested. March 17
the departure began, the British carrying with them to Halifax about
1000 residents of the town who were loyal to the king, and some of
whom had been so prominent on that side that they did not trust
themselves in a community ruled by the whigs.
While Howe spent the winter inactive in Boston the
hi°theISt! British projected an expedition against the Carolinas,
Carolinas. where the loyalists were numerous. It was expected that
a fleet would easily take Charleston and overawe the rich
planters of the South Carolina coast, who were the leaders of the
BRITISH ATTEMPT IN THE CAROLINAS 183
American cause in the colony. It would then go to the mouth of
the Cape Fear, where it would be joined by a loyal army from North
Carolina and the British authority would thus be reestablished in the
two colonies. Along the Cape Fear were many Highlanders, who
had no sympathy with the whig doctrines, and it was certain that
most of them would come out to defend the crown. In this province,
also, were the Regulators, members of an organization which existed
from 1767 to 1771 to deal with extortionate lawyers and exorbitant
country officials in what were then called the "back counties."
They at last rose in impotent wrath, whipped such lawyers as they
could lay hands on, and broke up the Hillsborough court. Governor
Tryon suppressed them at the battle of Alamance, 1771 ;
at which most of the men now prominent in the revolution £j®rg egu"
in North Carolina fought under the governor. The Reg-
ulators had good memories, they would have little to do with the
whig movement, and when the news went abroad that a force was
gathering at Fayetteville by command of the king to deal summary
punishment to Caswell, Harnett, Ashe, and others of the old legis-
lative oligarchy, they came to its assistance to the number of several
hundred.
Thus it was that 1600 Highlanders and former Regulators under
Donald MacDonald started from Fayetteville February 18, 1776, to
join the expected fleet at Wilmington. Caswell was on
the alert, and they were intercepted by a whig force of
1000 men at Moore's Creek Bridge on February 27. In creek,
a sharp battle the loyalists were defeated, their baggage
taken, and all who were not killed or captured were driven in confusion
to their homes.
Meanwhile the cooperating fleet was delayed, and it was the middle
of April when it reached the mouth of the Cape Fear. Here it loitered
six weeks until convinced that no successful demonstra-
tion would be made in the interior, and then it proceeded pjJhure at
against Charleston. Six thousand militia held the town, Charleston,
and a fort of green palmetto logs on Sullivan's Island
commanded the channel, Colonel Moultrie in charge. The British
might have surrounded this work and forced it to surrender, but with
characteristic contempt for the colonials, they tried to batter it down,
June 28, 1776. Their solid shot only buried themselves in the soft
logs of the fort, whose well directed fire swept the decks of the fleet, and
the attacking party were glad to withdraw with the loss of only one-
vessel. The Carolinas were saved, the South remained unshaken, and
the Americans were encouraged generally.
At Boston and in the South the patriots acted on the defensive and
succeeded. The result was otherwise in Canada, where they assumed
the offensive. It was thought that the French Canadians would gladly
throw off the British yoke, and in the autumn of 1775 two columns
i84 THE CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION
marched against Quebec. One, led by Montgomery, 1500 strong,
took Montreal by way of Lake Champlain, while another, under Arnold,
starting with 1 100 men, marched through Maine and came,
a^ter terrikle sufferings, with only 500 survivors before
uebec. Quebec. Here the two columns united, but a joint attack
failed to take the place. Montgomery was killed, and
Arnold remained through the winter before Quebec. The natives
gave him no assistance. Reenf orced, he was gradually forced back by
Sir Guy Carleton, commanding in Canada, but by disputing every mile
of the way he delayed his antagonist and prevented Carlton's coopera-
tion in the movements which Howe, as we shall see, was about to
make against the lower Hudson.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The ante-revolutionary controversy has usually had a biased treatment, whether
described by Americans or Englishmen. But one may rely on the fairness of
Howard, Preliminaries of the Revolution (1905) ; Channing, History of the United
States, vol. Ill (1912) ; and Woodburn, Causes of the American Revolution (Johns
Hopkins Studies, XI, 1893). Of the older histories Bancroft, History of the United
States, 10 vols. (1834-1874), is full, but pro- American ; and Hildreth, History of
the United States, 6 vols. (1851-1856, 1882), which is accurate and just, is patriotic
and lacks perspective. An admirable piece of work, but from the American
point of view, is Frothingham, Rise of the Republic (new ed. 1890). Lecky,
History of England in the Eighteenth Century, vol. Ill (1878-1890), treats the
causes of the revolution in a spirit of fairness. Professor Woodburn has pub-
lished all Lecky 's treatment of the revolution under the title, The American
Revolution, 1763-1783 (1898). G. O. Trevelyan, The American Revolution, 4 vols.
(1899-1912), is well written and is in sympathy with America; Doyle's chapter in
the Cambridge Modern History, vol. VII (1903) is a good summary. Of the older
histories of England, Mahon's (1853-1854) and Adolphus's (1840-1845) are of
tory sympathy, and Massey's (1855-1863) is whig in feeling.
For general sources, on the American side see : Force, American Archives,
4th series, 6 vols., and 5th series, 3 vols. (1837-1853) ; Niles, Principles and Acts
of the Revolution (ed. 1876) ; Moore, Diary of the American Revolution (1863),
chiefly reprinted from newspapers ; Gibbes, Documentary History of the Revolution
(1889); and Durand, New Material for the American Revolution (1889), from
French sources. The British official sources are: Cobbett-Hansard, Parlia-
mentary History, vols. XV-XVIII ; Cavendish, Debates of the House of Commons,
1768-1771, 3 vols. (1841-1843); Journal of the House of Commons, vols. XXIX-
XXXVI; Journal of the House of Lords, 3 vols., ed. Rogers (1875); Calendar of
Home Office Papers, 1760-1775, 3 vols. (1878-1899); and Statutes at Large, 109
vols. (1762-1866). These British sources are quite unwieldy, but for the careful
student of the period they are essential. MacDonald, Select Charters (1899),
contains the most important documents.
Of the Works and lives of the leading Americans of the time the following are
important: Samuel Adams, Writings, Gushing, ed., 4 vols. (1904-1908); Dick-
inson, Waitings, ed. by P. L. Ford, vol. i (1895); Franklin, Complete Works,
ed. by Bigelow, 10 vols. (1887-1888); Stephen Hopkins, Works, 3 vols. (1854);
Theodoric Bland, Papers, 2 vols. (1840-1843) ; Henry, Life of Patrick Henry,
3 vols. (1891), contains valuable correspondence; Josiah Quincy, Memoirs of
Josiah Quincy, Junior (1824 and 1875) ; and Rowland, Life of George Mason,
2 vols. (1892). On the British side see: Edmund Burke, Works, 12 vols. (ed.
1871) ; Chatham, Correspondence, ed. Taylor, 4 vols. (1838) ; Francis Thackeray,
THE NORTH DURING THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 185
Chatham, 2 vols. (1827) ; Almon, Anecdotes of William Pitt, 3 vols. (ed. 1810) ;
Grenville Papers, ed. Smith, 4 vols. (1853) ; Keppel, Memoirs of the Marquis of
Rockingham, 2 vols. (1852) ; Donne, Correspondence of George III with Lord
North, 2 vols. (1867) ; Horace Walpole, Memoirs of the Court of George III, 4 vols.
(ed. 1894); and Ibid., Letters, ed. by Cunningham, 9 vols. (1857). Of great value
are the letters from British officials in America, especially : Hutchinson, Diary and
Letters, 2 vols. (1883-1886); Bernard, Select Letters (1774); Bradford, Speeches
of the Governors and Answers of the Representatives [of Massachusetts], 1765-1775
(1818) ; Kimball, Correspondence of the Governors of Rhode Island, 1723-1775,
2 vols. (1902-1903) ; Browne, Correspondence of Governor Sharpe [of Maryland],
3 vols. (1888-1895) ; and the Colden Papers, 2 vols., in N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections,
(1876-1877). Valuable documents on this period are to be found in all the pub-
lished records of the individual colonies. See also Almon, Collection of Papers
Relating to the Dispute (1777).
Of local histories and other works see : Hutchinson, History of the Province of
Massachusetts Bay, 3 vols. (1795-1828), by a royal governor, but commendably
impartial and accurate; Minot, History of Massachusetts, 1748-1765, 2 vols.
(1798-1803), on the American side; Moultrie, Memoirs of the Revolution, 2 vols.
(1802); Drayton, Memoirs of the American Revolution, 2 vols. (1821); Ramsay,
History of the Revolution in South Carolina, 2 vols. (1785) ; and Jones, New York
in the Revolutionary War, 2 vols. (ed. of 1879). The material in the Annual
Register on the period just before our revolution is believed to have been chiefly
from Edmund Burke. On two important episodes see : Bassett, The Regulators of
North Carolina (Am. Hist. Assn. Report, 1894), and Hoyt, The Mecklenburg Declar-
ation of Independence (1907). The state histories generally contain valuable
information on the causes of the revolution.
On special topics see : Tyler, Literary History of the American Revolution, 2 vols.
(1897) ; Beer, The Commercial Policy of England toward the Colonies (Columbia
Univ. Studies, vol. Ill, 1893); Ibid., The Old Colonial System [1660-1754], 2 vols.
(1912) ; Ibid., British Colonial Policy, 1754-1765 (1907) ; Lord, Industrial Experi-
ments in the British Colonies (Johns Hopkins Univ. Studies, extra, 1898) ; Cross,
The American Episcopate and the American Colonies (Harvard Historical Studies,
1902); Van Tyne, Loyalists in the American Revolution (Ibid., 1902); Hunt, The
Provincial Committees of Safety of the American Revolution (1904) ; and Coffin, Province
of Quebec and the Early American Revolution (Univ. of Wisconsin Bulletins, 1, 1896).
For Independent Reading
Tyler, Patrick Henry (1893) > Anne Maury, Memoirs .of a Huguenot Family
(1872); Burnaby, Travels through the Middle Settlements [1759-1760] (1775);
G. O. Trevelyan, The American Revolution, 4 vols. (1899-1912); Hosmer,
Samuel Adams (1893) ; Morse, Benjamin Franklin (1892) ; Frank Moore, Songs
and Ballads of the American Revolution (1856) ; and Sargent, Loyalist Poetry of the
Revolution (1857).
CHAPTER IX
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
THE DECLARATION or INDEPENDENCE
BY the close of 1775 only the exporters and merchants in England
thought of yielding to America. The landholders, who controlled
parliament, and Englishmen generally, believed that re-
Converting beiiion existed and should be suppressed. The king was
servatives. for coercion. He would not receive the petition of the
second continental congress, and when he heard of Bun-
ker Hill, proclaimed the Americans rebels and forbade commercial
intercourse with them. Parliament closed the American ports and
authorized the impressment of American sailors for service in the royal
navy. As further notice of the unyielding intention of the British,
Falmouth, Maine (Portland), was burned in October and Norfolk, Vir-
ginia, on January 1,1776. At this time the second continental congress
was sitting in a second session, holding back such impetuous members
as Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry, and waiting for sentiment to
form. It was now so evident that the colonies must submit or fight
that most of the conservatives gave up their opposition to independ-
ence. Jefferson expressed the general opinion when he wrote:
" I will cease to exist before I yield to a connection on such terms as
the British Parliament proposes."
In January, 1776, appeared at Philadelphia a pamphlet called
"Common Sense," by "an Englishman." It stated the case of the
colonies in the plain language of the people, and was widely
read. What all had been thinking was here plainly stated.
"The period of debate," said the author, "is closed.
Arms, as the last recourse, must decide the contest. The appeal was
the choice of the king and the continent hath accepted the challenge."
At first this bold utterance was attributed to Franklin, but it soon
became known that it was written by Thomas Paine, an Englishman
then resident about a year in America. In later years he became un-
popular on account of his writings against the Christian religion ; but
history cannot forget that he was an important promoter of the rev-,
olution.
By the spring of 1776 the conservatives were driven to the last
ditch. They desired some form of colonial home rule which should
preserve British sovereignty and leave the colonies a large measure
186
INDEPENDENCE ASSERTED 187
of self-direction. They were strong in the middle colonies, especially
in Pennsylvania and New York, where the older settlements felt
much apprehension at the prospect of a democratic up-
heaval which should disturb the political center of gravity. Waning In-
New England, Virginia, and North Carolina were clearly fa**£e
with the radicals, and South Carolina and Georgia servatives.
.were undecided. Colonial home rule was far from
the thought of king and parliament, and as this fact became more ap-
parent in America the more the conservatives found themselves at sea.
While Congress thus hesitated in the hope of uniting the two fac-
tions within its membership, North Carolina, the one democratic
Southern colony, authorized her delegates at Philadelphia
to support independence. It was the step uppermost in state Action
the minds of the radicals, and other colonies followed ^^ilend-0*
rapidly. May 15 congress advised the colonies to con- ence.
tinue no longer in the parlous state in which they then
were, but to erect themselves into states, with governments resting on
the consent of the people. The advice had already been anticipated
by Virginia, where a convention met on May 5, and on the i$th de-
clared Virginia independent of Great Britain. This action by the
oldest and largest of the thirteen colonies had a most powerful effect
on the hestitating ones. South Carolina and Georgia could not hold
out longer, and Maryland and New Jersey showed signs of weakening.
June 7, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia gave further evidence of the
leadership his state had assumed when he introduced in congress three
important resolutions. They declared : (i) that the
thirteen colonies were and ought to be free and independ- ™ej)e c-^
ent, (2) that foreign alliances should be made, and
(3) that steps should be taken to adopt a general plan of enceT
confederation. The conservatives, led by Dickinson of
Pennsylvania, who still clung to colonial home rule, suggested that the
first resolution might well await action on the third, and the idea was
adopted ; but a committee consisting of Jefferson, Franklin, John
Adams, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston was appointed to
draught a declaration. Preparing a form of general government
proved a slow affair, and July i the question of independence was
again taken up. Little discussion was necessary, and July 2 congress
voted in its favor and called on the committee for a written declaration,
the New York delegates refusing to vote. Then was brought in the
famous paper, chiefly the work of Jefferson, which with slight changes
was formally adopted on July 4. August 2 an engrossed copy was
signed by the members present, some of whom were not in attendance
on July 4, and later on some signed who were absent on August 2.
By this time the New York delegates had been instructed to sign, and
thus the declaration had the support of all the thirteen colonies. The
report of the committee to prepare a plan of confederation was made
i88 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
July 12, but it met such opposition that it was not until November
17, 1777, that an agreement could be reached (see page 238).
The Declaration of Independence is one of the great documents of
history. All that Locke and his followers in England and France had
it c t t asserted about the nature of government was here re-
asserted and made a practical matter. Here we read that
"all men are created equal," that they have the right to "life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness," to secure which governments are es-
tablished, that the right to rule is derived "from the consent of the
governed," and that when a given government ceases to guarantee
these privileges, "it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it,
and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such prin-
ciples, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem
most likely to effect their safety and happiness." Here was stated the
theoretical basis of the American government. In justification of the
revolution the Declaration further set forth a long series of acts of
tyranny committed by the king and parliament against which the
colonies had protested in vain. It closed with the noble assertion
that "these united colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and
independent states," and for the support of this assertion they mu-
tually pledged to each other "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred
honor."
THE CAMPAIGN AROUND NEW YORK, 1776
The central position on the Atlantic coast is New York. Howe, in
Boston, well knew it, and would have gone thither directly had he not
been forced to leave that city with a beaten army. His
^taten°is- staY at Halifax was snort- Gathering supplies and re-
land611 cruits he soon sailed southward, and June 25 was off Sandy
Hook, welcomed warmly by Governor Tryon and the
loyalists, whom the whigs had forced to leave the city. By the be-
ginning of August he had 32,000 men on Staten Island, and an ex-
cellent fleet under his brother, Earl Howe, lay in the lower harbor.
Washington also appreciated the importance of New York, and
repaired thither with his army as soon as the evacuation of Boston
gave him opportunity. He strengthened the defenses of
the city, then on the lower end of the island. The ap-
proach by water was defended by works on Governor's
Island, and at Paulus Hook (Jersey City), and Red Hook,
on Long Island, and by obstructions in the channel. As a second
line of defense, if such should be necessary, Forts Lee and Washington
were constructed on opposite sides of the Hudson at a point near
what is now i83rd street. So far the work was good; but reflection
showed that the easiest approach was by way of Brooklyn, and that
the key to that position was a wooded ridge, Brooklyn Heights, or
the Heights of Guana, two miles behind the village and extending
THE BRITISH ON LONG ISLAND
189
from the Narrows to the northeast. It was passable by artillery at
the shore, at Flatbush Pass, and at Jamaica Pass, the last six miles
or more from the shore. To hold Brooklyn and this approach to it he
detailed General Nathanael Greene with 7000 men. The rest, about
2 1 ,000, were distributed among the various fortified positions or held
in readiness in the city.
Howe's first operations against New York, unlike his later move-
ments, were energetic, and showed a disposition to utilize his
advantage of superior strength. August 22, he threw a
large part of his army across the Narrows and lay before The Battle
Greene's force at the western end of Brooklyn Heights. ^^ yn
This American commander was ill from fever, and Washing- August^?
ton sent General Israel Putnam to take command. Put- 1776.
nam's courage and patriotism had been proved on many
occasions, but he was not a commander either by training or natural
endowment, and in this case he left the several parts of the army to
take care of themselves. Howe's attack was made on the morning of
August 27. Dividing his army into three columns, he sent the first
to threaten the Americans along the shore, another was to move
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
through Flatbush,on their center, While a third, which he led in person,
was to make a wide detour around their left. The turning move-
ment was made in the night of August 26, and took Putnam completely
by surprise. Knowing by the cannonading that it was time to ad-
vance, the first and second columns then attacked vigorously, and the
Americans, taken in front and rear, were forced back into the defenses
of the village of Brooklyn with a loss of 1500 men, noo of whom were
captured.
Washington threw reinforcements across the East river to save the
remnant of the army. He was reluctant to abandon the position;
for the cliff-like "fteights" of Brooklyn, now the abode
fromESCape of the city's most Promment families, and not to be con-
Brooklyn, founded with the scene of the battle of the 27th, dominated
lower New York. A day's experience showed him that
he had committed an error. If the British fleet forced its way into
the river, he would be caught in a trap from which he could not hope
to escape. That such a thing did not happen probably was due to
a strong northeast wind which held for three days, and made it im-
possible for the ships to beat up the river. In the evening of the 2Qth
Washington began to transfer his army in such boats as he could find.
Late in the night the wind fell, and in the following morning a dense
fog settled over the scene. Under its protection the army and all the
supplies except a few heavy guns were removed to safety, to the
extreme disgust of Howe, who had thought the victims all but
taken.
New York was now abandoned, the Americans retreating toward
the north end of the island. A British force followed, but was beaten
off in a rear-guard action, the Battle of Harlem, over
of Harlem ground on which Columbia University now stands. It
was now, September 22, that Captain Nathan Hale,
formerly a Connecticut schoolmaster, was shot for a spy. He had
volunteered to go into New York to obtain information, and when
arrested avowed his mission. His dying words, "I only
Hale*11 regret I have but one life to lose for my country," were
soon repeated at every patriot's fireside in the land. For
a short time there was an interval of inaction, after which Howe moved
eastward to get around Washington's strongly intrenched position
north of Harlem. At Pell's Point Colonel Glover, of
Massachusetts, with 750 men held back the British column
October 22. °^ 4°°°> inflicting a loss of 800, and by his spirited resistance
changing Howe's determination to make a turning move-
ment. The result was the battle of White Plains, October 22, an
attack on Washington's front, delivered deliberately. The Americans
were driven back after inflicting a serious loss. Howe had penetrated
their lines, but a rain storm intervened, and Washington withdrew to a
strong position at Newcastle.
GLOOM IN NEW JERSEY
191
Forts
Washington
and Lee
Howe now gave up the idea of crushing his antagonist, who was
clearly too wary for such a fate, and attempted to take Forts Washing-
ton and Lee. His ships had passed freely between them,
and Washington told Greene, who was in direct command,
to abandon them if it seemed advisable. He himself
took steps to construct in the Highlands other defenses of captured,
the important river, which seemed to invite invasion from
Canada. As the British threatened New Jersey, he moved a portion of
his army across the river, thus dividing his force. Then Howe closed
in on Fort Washington and forced it to surrender with 2600 men, the
best in the American army. Rapidly moving across the Hudson he
took Fort Lee with a large quantity of supplies, barely giving the garri-
son opportunity to escape to the western wing near Hackensack.
The eastern wing, 7000 strong at Newcastle, was com-
manded by Lee, whom Washington vainly ordered to his The Contest
aid in New Jersey. Lee was willful and selfish. Second transferred
in command, he enjoyed the prospect of promotion to to New
first place if calamity befell his superior ; and by his dis- Jersey-
obedience he was willing to contribute to that end.
Flushed by success, Howe now believed the war all but ended. His
opponents were divided and discouraged, and many of their regiments
anxiously awaited the end of the year when their terms
of enlistment would expire. All this he well knew from the J.he R®treat
TII through
tones, who were numerous. It seemed easy to complete New jersey
the destruction of a foe thus situated, and that honor he
awarded to Lord Cornwallis, who with 5000 men moved quickly against
the 6000 Washington now had at Newark. Under these circumstances,
battle was impossible, and the campaign resolved itself into an Ameri-
can retreat. At Brunswick most of the Maryland and New Jersey
militia marched home, spite of the pleas of their commander, because
their terms of service had expired. Washington, left with only 3000
men, fell back rapidly, and December 8 placed his army with the
baggage on the south side of the Delaware at Trenton. As he trans-
ferred his last battalions, the British vanguard arrived, but he had se-
cured all the boats for seventy miles along the river and was safe for
the time. To congress he appealed for help, urging that militia were
inadequate, and asking that a continental army be enlisted for the war.
Meanwhile, to many people, the cause of independence seemed
doomed. Howe issued a proclamation, offering pardon to those who
submitted, and 2700 people accepted it, among them the
president of the New Jersey committee of safety. In 0>fistje*y
Philadelphia, thirty miles from Trenton, there was great Americans,
terror. Merchants closed their stores, congress adjourned
to Baltimore, martial law was established, and the roads were thronged
with fugitives. In its dismay, congress gave Washington full power
to carry on the war as he saw fit.
iQ2 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
The manner in which he justified their confidence is one of the
gratifying stories of the war. At Trenton was Colonel Rail with 1400
men, mostly Hessians, who by committing numerous
Th®Ba*tles outrages on the inhabitants had made themselves thor-
andPri^e- oughly hated. On Christmas night Washington under-
ton. took to seize this force. Dividing his army into three
columns he ordered them across the Delaware to surround
the enemy's position. Two were turned back by obstacles, but the
third, with which he himself marched, reached the north bank of the
river, advanced eight miles through a storm of sleet, seized the only
road which offered a means of escape, and forced the Hessians to a
battle in which Rail was killed and 1000 of his men were captured and
carried safely into Pennsylvania. Immediately recrossing the Dela-
ware, he again faced the enemy, who concentrated a strong force at
Trenton and believed they were about to crush their opponents. But
Washington, leaving his camp fires burning brightly, slipped away
during the night, passed the British flank, and in the early morning of
January 3, 1777, defeated a strong column at Princeton. From these
two victories came a revival of hope, which promoted the enlistment of
troops, and as the remnant of Lee's army had now joined, the worst of
the recent danger was passed. Washington manifested his confidence
by taking position at Morristown, New Jersey, where he was not dis-
turbed. Howe, on the other hand, did not dare leave his army in
outposts throughout New Jersey, and that province once more passed
under American authority. Washington's military prowess has
sometimes been questioned, and one cannot deny that there were long
intervals when he seemed to be content to let well enough alone, but
in the battles of Trenton and Princeton, as in the campaign against
Yorktown, when spurred by a great necessity, he showed aggressive-
ness and resourcefulness of the highest order. Frederick the Great
said that Washington's success from December 25, 1776, to January
4, 1777, was "the most brilliant" in military history.
THE CAMPAIGNS OF 1777, PHILADELPHIA AND SARATOGA
For a time events had seemed to confirm the hope of the king that
the war would be short and easy. But the end of the year 1776
changed the prospect. "All our hopes," said Germain,
inAmeri*aCe the colonial secretary, in 1779, "were blasted by that
unhappy affair at Trenton." In fact, when spring came
in 1777, two years after the affair at Lexington, the British held no
parts of the colonies except New York and Newport, Rhode Island.
Elsewhere the people went quietly about their business, saw the whig
politicians call provincial congresses and adopt state constitutions,
read the laws of the continental congress, and gave a passive obedience
to the new regime. But the call for soldiers was slightly heeded,
POPULAR SENTIMENT
partly because the people were accustomed to look to the states for
political authority, and had no love for the newborn congress, partly
because of inherited jealousy of a standing army, and partly because
there had in the past been so little popular participation in govern-
ment that the ordinary man felt little responsibility on its account.
Try as it might, congress could not raise an army. Making allowance
for the tories and slaves, there were in the thirteen states in 1777 about
200,000 men of the military age, yet Washington, with power to
offer as liberal terms as he chose, had in the early spring no more than
IfcUoalxut
VALUE YFOROE,
AND
BRANDYVTTNK.
4000 regulars. Besides these, his hope was the militia, which the ex-
perience of the preceding year taught him to esteem lightly.
It was a small force to oppose the operations then being planned by
the British government. Three strong columns were to cooperate in
seizing the Hudson in order to cut in two the area of re-
sistance ; one under General Burgoyne was to move from
Montreal by way of Lake Champlain ; another under St.
Leger was to march from Oswego through the Mohawk valley, and
a third, Howe's army, was to advance up the Hudson from New York.
The three armies were expected to meet at or near Albany. By
Germain's carelessness, an order to participate in this movement was
not sent to Howe, who, thinking himself free to fight where he chose,
decided to take Philadelphia.
i94 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
Leaving the militia of New England and New York to impede Bur-
goyne, Washington kept a sharp eye on the force in New York. To his
astonishment that force first moved to Staten Island, then
Brand wine embarked °n a, great flotilla of 250 vessels. This action
Washington considered a ruse, but as the ships stood
southward the American army entered Pennsylvania. After some
days of anxiety lest Howe, doubling his tracks, should get far up the
Hudson before the Americans reached New Jersey, Washington at
last learned that his opponents were at Elkton, at the head of Chesa-
peake Bay, thirty-five miles southwest of Philadelphia. He moved
southward immediately to protect the capital, and on September n
the two armies faced one another on opposite sides of Brandy wine
Creek. The Americans, including the militia, were 11,000, and the
British 18,000. Howe used his superior numbers, as at Brooklyn
Heights. Leaving 5000 men in front of Washington, he marched
around the American right wing and placed his opponents between
two fires. Washington was taken by surprise. While the flanking
movement was being made he gave orders to fall on the British in
detail. The attack was just beginning when an erroneous dispatch
arrived, seeming to indicate that Howe's flanking movement was a
feint. Then followed an hour's hesitation, by which the opportunity
of defeating a divided foe was lost. The Americans threw themselves
bravely on the two divisions, and by hard fighting held the field until
night enabled them to withdraw in safety to Chester, each side losing
about 1000 men. September 26 the British entered Philadelphia and
began to fortify it.
Most of the British army went into camp at Germantown, seven
miles from Philadelphia, and Washington, hovering in the neighbor-
hood, determined to surprise it early in the morning of
October 4. He now had 9000 continentals to whom recent
town!41 campaigning had given the fiber of regulars. ^ The attack
was made in a dense fog, which made the surprise a success,
but led to confusion on both sides. But the Americans carried all
before them and seemed to have won a victory, when six British com-
panies took refuge in the stone house of Chief Justice Chew and of-
fered such resistance that the attacking line was delayed until the re-
treating regiments could make a new stand. By that time reenforce-
ments had come up from Philadelphia, and Washington withdrew from
the battle with a loss of noo men, while his opponents lost 500. In
.December he went into winter quarters at Valley Forge, where he could
keep his eye on Philadelphia.
Burgoyne's campaign was the sequel of the American
Arnold expedition against Quebec in 1775. After Montgomery's
CarSton death, Arnold remained in command of the invaders and
contested every foot of the ground over which they fell
back. Sir Guy Carleton, has opponent and governor of Canada, pressed
BURGOYNE'S SLOW ADVANCE 195
him vigorously, and when Howe began his campaign against New York,
August, 1776, the two forces had reached the northern end of Lake
Champlain. To hold this lake each side began to construct a fleet of
small boats. Arnold's squadron was weaker than that of his foe, but
he directed it with great skill, and though twice defeated, delayed the
British until early November, when Carleton concluded that it would
be unwise to continue a progress involving the capture of Ticonderoga
in the winter. He accordingly withdrew his entire force to Canada.
Arnold's bold resistance had been of great service ; for had Carleton
found less opposition he would have reached the Hudson in time to
join hands with Howe before Washington was able to escape out of
New Jersey.
A practical difficulty now arose in regard to the command. Carleton
ranked Howe in the British army, but the latter had been promised
a free hand in America. To avoid an unpleasant clash of
authority the command of the former was, therefore, by command"*
orders from England limited to Canada, and the conduct
of the invading operations of 1777 was given to Burgoyne, a man of
less ability. Carleton could only submit, but it was a bitter pill to
see 8000 of his best troops march away in June, 1777. Of this force
675 went with St. Leger, the rest with Burgoyne, both columns ac-
companied by Indians.
The main body were before Ticonderoga on July i, and St. Clair,
who commanded there with 3000 men, abandoned the place rather
than allow himself to be besieged. The Americans with-
drew in good order, fighting a sharp rear-guard action at
Hubbardton. They were in good spirits, and by obstruct-
ing the roads made the enemy's progress tedious. Boats and supplies
must be carried overland to Lake George, and from the southern end
of that body of water by portage to the Hudson, at Fort Edward. It
was July 29 before the latter place was reached, and another month
passed before thirty days' rations were transported thither. By that
time Burgoyne's commissary was so much depleted that he was im-
pelled to replenish it by a raid in Vermont, then a part of New Hamp-
shire. Thus was projected Baum's expedition to Bennington.
Burgoyne had been told that the people of Vermont were loyal, and
he thought 500 men, all Brunswickers, enough for the task assigned
to Baum. The event showed how much he was misin-
formed. The Vermonters rose in great numbers when they
heard that the Germans were among them. They found
an excellent leader in John Stark, until recently a colonel under Wash-
ington, but now without a command on account of the indifference of
congress to his worth. Placed in command of the New Hampshire
militia, he raised 800 men and was beyond the mountains before Baum
knew of his movement. He came upon the Germans at Bennington,
cleverly surrounded them, and in a vigorous battle on August 16
196
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
killed or captured nearly all. In the moment of victory a second
body of British came up to reenforce Baum, and they too were
defeated, the total British loss being 800.
Burgoyne heard the news with dismay.
Hard after it came the information that St.
Leger's expedition through the Mohawk val-
ley was driven back to Canada.
Drive? Back. That officer had reached Oswego
safely. Proceeding up the Seneca
river to Lake Oneida, and thence by a short
portage, he came to Fort Schuyler, or Stanwix,
on the upper Mohawk. This post had, to
his surprise, been recently strengthened, and
was so well held by a garrison of 750 men
that St. Leger was obliged to resort to a
regular siege. By this time a large number
of settlers, mostly Germans, occupied the
valley. They were loyal Americans, and flew
to arms under General Herkimer, who led 800
of them to the relief of the beleaguered fort.
At Oriskany they marched into a trap set
for them by St. Leger. But instead of re-
treating they leaped behind trees and stones
and fought so well in the frontier fashion
that the British were driven back to the
fort, only to find that during their absence
the garrison, sallying out of the walls, had
entered the camp of the besiegers and car-
ried off enough supplies to enable them to
protract their defense many days. This
success aroused enthusiasm in the American
army on the Hudson, and Arnold, with 2000
soldiers, was sent to drive off St. Leger.
That officer was now in extreme danger, and
withdrew hastily to Lake Ontario, August 22,
his Indian allies deserting in a body.
These two successes encouraged the Ameri-
cans, and militia from New England and New
York gathered daily at Albany
and marched up the Hudson to
meet the invaders. By Septem-
ber i they were 10,000, and a
month later 20,000. Massachu-
setts sent a large number commanded by General Lincoln. At
first General Schuyler was in chief command, but he was unpopular
with the New Englanders, and dissension was imminent. To secure
Gates in
Command
against Bur-
goyne.
Crown Point .
BURGOYNE DEFEATED 197
harmony, congress now sent General Gates, formerly an English
officer who, like Charles Lee, had offered his services early in
the war and had been made a major general. Like Lee, also,
he had intrigued against Washington. He was loyal to the cause, but
incompetent, and the success he now won was chiefly due to his able
subordinates, Lincoln, Arnold, and Morgan. He placed his army
across the British line of approach, at Bemis Heights, on the Hudson,
about twenty-five miles south of Fort Edward. Before it Burgoyne
appeared September 19, his force reduced to 5000 men
by recent losses, by desertion, and by the necessity of First and
leaving garrisons behind him. In front of this position, jj^es f
at Freeman's Farm, or Still water, was fought a very vig- Freeman's
orous skirmish, in which the British lost nearly 500 men. Farm.
Then Burgoyne, although his troops were on reduced
rations, lay inactive for three weeks. October 7 he threw out his right
wing to ascertain Gates's strength, and the result was another en-
gagement at Freeman's Farm, the British loss being 600 men, several
cannon, and much ammunition. Convinced that he could go no
farther southward, Burgoyne turned about in an indecisive manner and
came to Saratoga. His position was precarious, for the Americans had
already appeared in strength on his line of communica-
tions ; but had he acted with energy after the yth he might
have escaped to Fort George without entire defeat. His goyne>
slow movements enabled his opponents to surround him,
and at Saratoga, October 17, he surrendered his army, the conditions
being that the troops should march to Boston, whence they might
return to England with the understanding that unless they were ex-
changed they were not to serve again in North America during the war.
Two weeks before the capitulation Clinton had started from New
York for Albany with a naval and military force. He took Forts
Montgomery and Clinton, and a part of his force reached Kingston,
but at that point it turned back because the channel was too shallow
for the ships. Thus ended the British campaign on the Hudson.
Gates's terms at Saratoga were lenient, and were granted because of
Clinton's demonstration up the Hudson. Though Burgoyne's troops
could not again serve in America, they might replace
European garrisons which were sent across the Atlantic, ^o^Re.
and as France was now about to join the United States they pudiated.
might be used against her. These reflections awakened
keen disappointment in congress and out of it. Demands were made
for the repudiation of the convention, but the same end was reached in
a less outspoken manner. Burgoyne fell to wrangling over the quar-
ters furnished his officers and declared the convention broken. This, it
was said, indicated that the British themselves would not keep it,
and it was decided to hold the captives until the agreement was ratified
by England. When it was discovered that Burgoyne had failed to
198 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
hand over some cartouch-boxes, congress made it the ground for openly
repudiating the terms. Some of the prisoners were exchanged, most
of the Germans were released to become American citizens, and the
rest were held until the war ended. The British bitterly charged us
with broken faith.
THE ALLIANCE WITH FRANCE
From the beginning of the revolution the Americans looked to France
for aid, but when in June, 1776, Silas Deane arrived in Paris as an
American agent he was not received by Vergennes, the
Early Aid foreign secretary. He found many friends in private cir-
France. c^es) an<^ when the news came that independence had been
declared the attitude of the government changed, although
open recognition was still carefully withheld. About this time the
firm of "Hortalez et Cie" began to sell general merchandise in the
capital, its largest dealings being with "Timothy Jones," of Bermuda,
to whom were sold large quantities of ammunition and firearms.
Those behind the scenes knew that "Jones" was in reality Silas Deane,
that the merchant company was Beaumarchais, better known as a
dramatist, and that most of the money with which "Jones" settled
his accounts was derived from secret loans from the kings of France
and Spain. Each monarch thus advanced a million livres ($200,000),
with which Deane purchased 30,000 stands of arms, 250 cannon, and
supplies of clothing. The British ambassador complained of these
proceedings, but Vergennes put him off with fair words . In the autumn ,
Franklin and Arthur Lee were appointed to aid Deane. Soon after
his arrival Lee quarreled with Deane and withdrew from Paris in
anger. Franklin, however, remained, and by his simple manners and
genuine kindness charmed all Paris. But he could not at that time
secure from the king the recognition of American independence.
With the French people he had better success, and the
Volunteers American cause became very popular in Paris. With the
young French noblemen it became the fashion of the day
to offer their services to the struggling American republic. Most of
them were mere enthusiasts, and their offers were declined ; but one,
who was accepted, proved a notable exception. The Marquis of
Lafayette, having come over at his own expense, arrived at Philadel-
phia with Kalb and twelve other French officers, just before the battle
of Brandywine. He offered to serve in any capacity ; Congress made
him a major-general, and the results justified their action. Kalb,
as well as Pulaski, a Pole, whom Franklin also sent to
and^Others America, proved efficient officers, and both fell in the cause
they espoused. We must not forget Baron von Steuben,
a Prussian officer, who also came to help the Americans, and whose
best service was to organize and drill the continental army.
BELATED CONCESSIONS 199
In 1777 Vergennes was ready to give open aid to America if Spain
would do the same. Before he could take the proper steps, news came
that Howe was in Philadelphia and that Burgoyne had
taken Ticonderoga, with the upper Hudson valley at his T"aties of
IT , ,1 iji Alliance,
mercy. Vergennes s enthusiasm suddenly cooled, and even I77g
Beaumarchais began to despair. Then came, December 7,
thestoryof Burgoyne's defeat. Beaumarchais, beside himself with joy,
is said to have dislocated his arm in his haste to inform the king. Paris
rejoiced as though Saratoga had been a French victory. Vergennes
sent off messengers to Madrid urging the king of Spain to recognize
American independence, and set to work at once on two treaties which,
signed February 6, 1778, created political and commercial bonds be-
tween France and the United States. Each nation promised to make
war on the enemies of the other, while the United States guaranteed
the sovereignty of the French West Indies, with certain privileges in
American ports. England and France were at war immediately,
but Spain held back. She had a new ministry and would not en-
courage revolution in America ; but in 1779 she declared war on Eng-
land, not, however, as an ally of the United States. The action of
France was undoubtedly due to her desire to weaken England, but it
is due to Vergennes and Louis XVI to say that they treated the United
States generously. If they had demanded harder terms, we must have
accepted them.
The battle of Saratoga had also its echo in London. Lord North,
the prime minister, announced, December 10, a forthcoming scheme
to end the war by conciliation. Two months later the
plan was revealed, and in March, 1778, parliament ap- Q^^
proved. The coercive acts of parliament were to be compromise,
repealed, full pardon was to be granted, and America
was to have all she demanded except independence. Commis-
sioners of pacification were sent to Philadelphia, but they found
the Americans indifferent. Only British self-confidence could as-
sume that in this situation the United States would desert
the newly made French alliance and accept the old position of
colonies.
The French alliance came none too soon, for the winter of 1777-1778
was a gloomy period for America. Without funds congress could do noth-
ing for the army, which suffered terribly at Valley Forge.
Food was plentiful in Pennsylvania, but the farmers would
not sell it for the depreciated continental currency, al-
though they gave it readily in exchange for British specie
at Philadelphia. In that city there was a festive season, loyalists
were numerous, and, Saratoga forgotten for the time being, men
began to think the continental cause desperate. From these depths
the public mind was raised by the news that France would help
with money, men, and ships.
200 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
The spring saw a change in England's military plans. It was de-
cided to take again the French West Indian islands, which had been
handed back in 1763, and to carry out that program the
Evacuated1* war on ^e American continent was suspended. At the
same time Sir William Howe was superseded by Clinton,
who was ordered to concentrate his army at New York and to abandon
Philadelphia if necessary. Obeying these orders, he sent off his heavy
baggage and abundant supplies by water and marched with the army
northward through New Jersey. Washington followed closely, and
July 28, 1778, forced him to fight at Monmouth, where the Americans
seemed to have the advantage. Washington wished Lafayette to
lead the attack, but Charles Lee, just released from a
Df .. British prison in which he had been conspiring to betray
Monmouth. .« . • i • j .-, -, ^ j •
the Americans, claimed the honor, and was placed in com-
mand. When the British appeared in front of his position, he gave
way after very little resistance. Washington, preparing to support
Lee by an attack elsewhere, learned that the advance was falling back.
Placing his troops across their way he checked the British advance,
and with the reformed columns of Lee held the enemy at bay until
night. Next morning the British were gone and reached New York
safely.
While Washington checked the flight of his advance troops he met
Lee, their commander. Suspecting treachery he broke forth in angry
reproaches, which posterity has easily forgiven. Lee
Charles Lee Cou\d do nothing less than ask for an investigation, and a
from^he^ court martial suspended him a year for disobedience and
Army. "misbehavior" before the enemy. During the year he
sent congress an improper letter, and for that was dis-
missed. He was a vain and showy man, whose tall talking won
him much respect when he threw in his fortunes with the Ameri-
cans. The men who could understand him soon discovered that he
wished to supplant Washington.
MINOR EVENTS IN THE NORTH, 1778-1782
The battle of Monmouth was the last general engagement in the
North, but it was followed by several minor incidents which history
cannot ignore. One was the operations of a French fleet
NeTort under Count d'Estaing which arrived at Philadelphia
nine days too late to intercept Lord Howe's squadron,
sent to convoy General Howe's store ships back to New York.
Prevented from following them by the assurances of the pilots that
his largest frigates could not enter New York harbor, d'Estaing decided
to attack Newport, Rhode Island, which the British had held since
December 6, 1776. He had 4000 French troops on board, and 9000
Americans, mostly New England militia, were gathered at Providence
ARNOLD'S DEFECTION 201
to cooperate in the attack. As the British had but 6000 men in New-
port, a great success seemed certain. Misunderstandings occurred
from the first between the Count and Sullivan, the American com-
mander, but the French troops were landed, and the initial stages of the
siege were entered. Then Howe's British fleet appeared and offered
battle, and the Frenchman, embarking his soldiers, sailed out to meet
him. As the ships maneuvered for position a storm broke and both
fleets must look to their safety. D'Estaing went to Boston for re-
pairs, and his attempt against Newport was not renewed. Meanwhile
Sullivan had invested the place and carried most of its outworks. He
and his officers protested against the departure of the French; and
when they heard that Clinton was sending a fleet and army to raise the
siege, they withdrew from Rhode Island lest they be surrounded.
An irritating controversy arose over the conduct of d'Estaing, and
Washington, as well as the continental congress, interfered to make
peace. In November the French fleet went to the West Indies, where
its operations, though not brilliant, served to draw off part of the
British forces from New York and left the Americans for a time in
comparative peace. In 1779 the British army at Newport was with-
drawn for the campaign against the Carolinas.
Reduced to inactivity, Clinton was fain to resort to the destruction
of the towns he could reach by water. In May, 1779, Norfolk and
Portsmouth, in Virginia, were destroyed, a hundred vessels
were taken, and 3000 hogsheads of tobacco were carried
back to New York. In July following, Tryon, command-
ing a body of tories, raided New Haven, Fairfield, and Norwalk, all
in Connecticut, leaving smoking ruins behind him. Such operations
did not promote the conquest of the Americans, and only served to
increase the horrors of war. In the same year Clinton moved up the
Hudson and took Stony Point and Verplanck's Point in .
the Highlands. Two months later the former was re-
taken by General Anthony Wayne in a well-planned night attack,
which greatly enhanced Wayne's reputation. But the Americans
could not hold the place, and it was reduced to ruins.
West Point, several miles higher up the river, was the chief reliance
for keeping back the enemy, and its command was given to Benedict
Arnold. This pathetic figure now approaches the end of
a thorny path whose exit was complete calamity. No
man in the army had better reason to complain of his
treatment. After the death of Montgomery he was the
life of the stout resistance in Canada, but he was passed over by con-
gress when it promoted four less deserving brigadiers to the rank of
major-general. At the time he was being investigated by a court
martial on charges which were plainly the result of spite and of which
he was completely exonerated. After that he was made a major-
general, but was not given the rank to which his former rating entitled
202 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
him. In the Saratoga campaign he was the soul of the American
army, and his leg was shivered as he charged recklessly in the second
battle of Freeman's Farm. Gates hated him cordially, and Washing-
ton, too just to ignore his merit, made him commander in Philadelphia,
after the withdrawal of Howe. Arnold was tactless, and soon quarreled
with congress, whose former treatment he openly resented. Charges
were brought against him, but an acquittal was had on all but two,
and these were so trivial that they should have been ignored. But
his enemies triumphed, and it was ordered that he be reprimanded.
Washington, in executing the judgment, made the reprimand a eulogy :
but Arnold was not pacified. During his residence in Philadelphia
he had married Margaret Shippen, a noted wit and beauty in tory
circles ; and an extravagant manner of living had run him into debt.
In disgust at his treatment by congress he decided to betray the cause
he served. He applied to Washington for the command of West
Point, the request was granted, and a bargain was made by which the
post was to be given up for 10,000 guineas and a brigadier-general's
commission.
Major John Andre was Clinton's adjutant. He was young, intelli-
gent, and socially popular ; but he did not mind playing spider to
Arnold. While the British army was in Philadelphia
ke was a friend of Margaret Shippen, and he conducted
the correspondence by which Arnold was led into mischief.
September 21, 1780, the two men met near Haverstraw to complete
the treason. Arnold handed over plans of West Point, with a de-
scription of its garrison, and gave Andre a pass to return to New York.
As the latter approached " Sleepy Hollow," near Tarrytown, he was
stopped and searched by three "skinners," American marauders, who
found his papers and carried him to the nearest American post. A
report was sent to Arnold, who fled quickly to the British. Andre was
tried as a spy. He urged that he was a soldier on regular service and
demanded to 'be treated as a prisoner of war ; but the court martial
held that wearing a disguise and carrying concealed papers fixed his
status as a spy, and he was executed. Washington would have ex-
changed him for Arnold, but Clinton felt obliged to protect the traitor
whom he had led into his present plight. West Point was saved to the
Americans, but the price promised was paid. Arnold's foolish error
blasted a brilliant career. Had he retired from the army as a protest
against his wrongs, the justice of the future would soon have brought
him vindication. In the British army his position was not pleasant,
and it was said that just before he died he called for his old American
uniform, saying, "May God forgive me for ever putting on any
other."
GEORGE ROGERS CLARK 203
THE WAR IN THE WEST
Before the revolution began, hardy settlers had crossed the Alle-
ghanies from both Virginia and North Carolina. The Indians saw
their advent with alarm, and in 1774 the settlements of
Kentucky were ravaged. Governor Dunmore, of Virginia,
marched against them and forced them to make peace
after a sharp defeat, the Indians relinquishing their claims
to Kentucky. This outbreak was known as "Lord Dunmore's War."
When the colonists began to resist England, both sides sought to
conciliate the savages of the West. The Indians, however, leaned
toward the stronger side, and with British aid the Cherokees in 1776
began hostilities. The most exposed part of the frontier
was the Watauga valley, in North Carolina. The in- Jherokees
habitants had warning, and retired safely into stockades, conquered.
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia sent out
bodies of militia which ravaged the Indian towns, and the Cherokees
made peace. For a time the Watauga settlements had relief, but
Kentucky continued to suffer from the Indians north of the Ohio.
The British also had influence with the Iroquois, who aided Carleton
in 1776 and Burgoyne in 1777. After Saratoga, the savages were not
needed for large military operations on the Canadian border,
but they were incited to raid the western settlements of
New York and Pennsylvania. The most important action
was a raid into the latter state by Colonel John Butler with a force of
tories and Seneca Indians. They fought and defeated an American
force, near Wilkesbarre, and then devastated the Wyoming valley at
leisure. Women and children were slain, and the rich valley was left
desolate. In the same year, 1779, a band similarly composed inflicted
ruin nearly as complete on Cherry valley, in central New York. A
retaliatory expedition under General Sullivan laid waste
the Seneca country and reduced the population to a crowd
of starving fugitives; but their chieftain, Joseph Brant,
gathered them into a fort at Niagara and continued the raids against
the settlements. The employment of Indians by the British was
strongly condemned by the Americans. The practice of paying them
for scalps only added to the horrors of the war and did not hasten its
end. Hamilton, British governor of the Northwest, who paid for
many scalps, was called the "Hair Buyer."
After 1776 the Kentuckians were not left free from molestation, and
this led to an act of retaliation which had a vast significance for the
"Hair Buyer." The stroke was nothing less than the
conquest of the Northwest, and George Rogers Clark was Expedition,
the author of the scheme. In January, 1778, he secured
from Governor Patrick Henry, of Virginia, a commission as lieutenant-
colonel with authority to raise 350 men for a secret expedition against
204 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
the British posts north of the Ohio. In May he set out from Wheeling,
going down the Ohio to the falls, where Louisville was soon to be
founded. After waiting here a month the expedition proceeded into
what is now Illinois, directing its course to the French town of Kas-
kaskia. The place was taken by surprise and without resistance.
The inhabitants willingly took the oath of allegiance when told that
France was now an ally of the United States, and when promised
religious toleration. The people of Cahokia and Vincennes also sub-
mitted on the same terms. Thus all the settlements of the Illinois
country passed into the hands of Clark, who had less than 200 men.
Hamilton, at Detroit, knew how weak was Clark's resources, and re-
took Vincennes in December. Feeling perfectly secure, he sent away
all his troops but 80, and awaited the spring. He under-
estimated the determination of his opponent, who on
Captured. February 5 set out for Vincennes with 170 men, some of
them of French blood. Before him the road, 1 70 miles long,
ran through a flat region, much of it covered by water. Around
Vincennes the country was a shallow lake through which the com-
mand waded, sometimes up to the neck. To add to their sufferings,
their provisions gave out, but luck sent them a deer, and three
days later they captured an Indian canoe with some food in it. Feb-
ruary 24 Clark came to Vincennes and invested the fort. Hamilton
was completely surprised and next day surrendered. There was great
joy in the western settlements when news came that "the Hair Buyer"
was taken and sent to Virginia, where he was kept in close confinement.
The western country was organized as Illinois county,
Count8 Virginia. The French settlements remained under Ameri-
can protection until the end of the war, but Detroit con-
tinued in British hands, and from it went forth many Indian raids.
Clark, now a brigadier-general, was anxious to take it, but was not
given the requisite means.
THE NAVY IN THE REVOLUTION
England's naval superiority gave the United States little opportu-
nity for achievements at sea ; but small cruisers well commanded
might inflict severe loss on British merchantmen, and
Cruisers and Privateers might operate successfully. In December,
Privateers. I775> congress ordered thirteen small men-of-war, and
before the end of the conflict forty-three others had been
placed on the ocean. Their average number of guns was twenty.
Many of these ships were captured before they did serious damage
to the enemy. Besides the continental ships, war vessels were owned
by all the states except New Jersey and Delaware, but most of the
state navies were for harbor defense. The ill disguised friendship
of France early enabled us to use her harbors for the sale of prizes,
JOHN PAUL JONES 205
and several cruisers as well as many privateers operated from that
safe base. Fitted out and furnished with a mongrel crew, such a ship
would intercept British vessels off the French coast, or in the channel,
or range along the British shore itself. Great Britain protested vigor-
ously to France against the abuse of neutrality. Sometimes her com-
plaints were heard and the American ships were warned to leave;
but the Americans invariably came back, and others followed their
example. When the war had gone on a year London merchants
estimated their actual losses at £1,800,000, besides having to meet a
great enhancement of freights and insurance. After the French
alliance was made the profits from seizing British ships must be shared
with Frenchmen. New England sent out most of the privateers, and
her citizens reaped vast profits from the business.
Of all our naval achievements during the revolution the most not-
able are associated with the name of John Paul Jones. Scotch by
birth and christened John Paul, he made several voyages
to Virginia, where his brother was settled. In 1773 this j°nes a
brother died, and John Paul inherited his property. About
this time he changed his name, taking that of his friend Willie Jones
of Halifax, who was probably that Willie Jones of Halifax, North
Carolina, who led the radical element in that colony in the days of
revolution. In December, 1775, he was appointed a lieutenant in
the infant navy and hoisted the first flag on a regularly commissioned
American war vessel. A year later he was a captain, and in one ship
after another displayed great activity and took many prizes. In one
of them, the Ranger, in 1778 he cruised in the Irish Sea, entered by
night the harbor of Whitehaven, and captured a sloop-of-war of twenty
guns. This showed him what could be done by a daring man with a
small squadron. By much entreaty he at last got from
the French king four ships, which, added to one of his own, g ^a^ron
made a squadron to be reckoned with. The largest, the
Bon Homme Richard, a converted Indiaman, carried 44 guns. Another,
the Pallas carried 30, and the rest carried 36, 18, and 12 respectively.
The crew was largely European, but all the ships flew the American flag.
August 14, 1779, the squadron began its memorable voyage. Pass-
ing along the west coast of Ireland and Scotland, destroying many
prizes, it came off the east coast of Scotland, where a storm frustrated
Jones's plan to destroy the shipping in Leith harbor. September 23,
near Hull, he sighted forty merchantmen convoyed by the
Serapis, mounting 50 guns, and the Countess of Scarborough,
28 guns. Jones gave chase and selected the Serapis as
his antagonist. He ordered his other ships to do the same, but only
the Pallas obeyed, her captain giving his attention to the Scarborough.
The engagement resolved itself into a conflict between the Serapis
and the Bon Homme Richard. At the first fire two of the American
guns burst, and Jones, realizing his inferiority in that line determined
206 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
to close and board. At his first attempt the ships did not come
alongside. Pearson, commanding the Serapis, called out to ask if
the Richard had struck her colors, and Jones's answer rang back:
"I have not yet begun to fight." A second attempt to come along-
side proved successful, and Jones lashed the two ships together
with his own hands. Then followed a severe hand to hand struggle
which cleared the deck of the Serapis of defenders. After this had
gone on for two hours, hand grenades fired the British ship and
she was forced to strike. Jones's own ship had six feet of water
in the hold and was on fire. She sank two days later. The Serapis
and the Scarborough were carried into port as prizes. Jones estab-
lished the tradition for heroism in the American navy. He was per-
sonally eccentric, and congress was slow in recognizing his services.
The participation of France in the war relieved the United States
of the necessity of contending against England by sea. It also
promoted the formation of the league of Northern powers
SVSSd for "armed neutrality." England used her immense
Neutrality." naval power with little regard to the interests of other
nations. She impressed seamen and seized neutral
goods not contraband as freely as she found them on foreign ships.
The other nations were equally interested in the policy that "free
ships make free goods," except as regards contraband articles.
This principle was asserted before our revolution by individual
writers and even by states, but it had not the force behind it necessary
to secure its acceptance. In 1778 France, whose goods were now
being seized, asked Russia to head a movement for united protest.
The request was accepted, and out of it proceeded the "Armed Neu-
trality" agreement, signed at first by Russia, Sweden, and Denmark,
but later accepted by Prussia, the Netherlands, the German Empire,
Portugal, Naples, Turkey, and the United States. The acceptance
of the league by the Netherlands led England to make war on that
power, although another reason was given for this breach of an ancient
friendship. Thus England's war against the colonies had enlarged
its scope until she saw arrayed against her, besides the colonies them-
selves, France, Spain, and Holland.
THE CAMPAIGN IN THE SOUTH, 1778-1781
Having failed to conquer the North, the British concluded to make
their next attempt in the South. They were told that the interior
parts, inhabited by small farmers who had not keenly felt
the restrictions on commerce, were largely loyal, and would
the£gpianof welcome the ^ arrival of a force strong enough to afford
Attack. them protection. The plan adopted was to begin with
Georgia, the weakest of the Southern states, and to roll up
the South from that point. Accordingly, in December, 1778, the work
RESTORING AUTHORITY IN THE SOUTH 207
began with the seizure of Savannah, from which place strong columns
proceeded to occupy the interior. To deal with the situation General
Lincoln was sent to assume command in the South. He found the
British general, Prevost, in the act of subduing South Carolina and
was able to drive him away from the vicinity of Charleston. Then
d'Estaing appeared off the coast, and a cooperative attack on Savannah
was begun. Here, as at Newport, the French admiral was soon out
of sympathy with the American general, and sailed away, alleging
that he could not expose his ships to the autumn storms of a dangerous
coast. As soon as he was gone Clinton came south with a strong
fleet and an army of 7000 men and began to besiege Charleston.
Lincoln unwisely allowed himself to be shut up in the city,
and in May, 1780, was forced to surrender with 5000
men. South Carolina was now at the mercy of the enemy,
who marched at will through the interior. The governor of the
state fled to Philadelphia to implore aid from congress, and no Ameri-
can army worthy of the name existed in the state. A mere remnant
was in the field under Colonel Buford, but Tarleton's Legion over-
whelmed it at Waxhaw. Some of the Americans escaped, but 500
asked for quarter. For reply, Tarleton fell on them with sabers and
pistols, leaving 113 dead and 150 so badly wounded that they could
not be moved. This harsh affair and other less notable examples of
British cruelty cowed the people. But much resentment was also
stimulated, and the result was the organization of several partisan
bands which kept up a vigilant warfare against such small detach-
ments of the enemy as fortune sent their way. Of the partisan leaders
the most famous were Sumter, Marion, Pickens, Clarke, and Davie,
the last being of North Carolina. Clinton did not esteem these
bands highly. He thought the province well reconquered, and early
in June returned to New York, leaving Cornwallis with
5000 men to hold what had been taken and to extend the
conquest into North Carolina. The British were pleased.
At the end of four years' fighting, one colony, Georgia, had been
forced to receive her repudiated royal governor, and in another the
revolutionary government had collapsed.
To save the situation, congress sent General Gates into the South.
The appointment was against the advice of Washington, who suggested
Greene; but the " hero of Saratoga" was still popular.
Charles Lee, who knew him well, offered this advice:
"Take care that your Northern laurels do not change
to Southern willows." Gates had 3000 troops, half of them militia,
and in August attacked Camden, an important position in central
South Carolina held by Lord Rawdon. Had he moved promptly,
he might have won the fight, for his force was the stronger ; but by
delaying he allowed Cornwallis to arrive with reinforcements, and the
battle, fought August 16, was a crushing defeat. The militia, from
208 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
Virginia and North Carolina, fled at the first attack, and the regulars
were surrounded and badly cut to pieces, while Kalb, who fought
bravely, was killed. The total American loss was 2000 killed, wounded,
and captured; that of the British was 300. Gates rode sixty miles
that summer's day, and did not cease his flight until in four days
he reached Hillsborough, North Carolina, 180 miles from the scene
of his defeat. He tried to call out more militia to oppose the enemy,
but his day was past. December 2, he was succeeded by General
Greene.
Before that time, the British had met their first check in the South,
at King's Mountain, October 7, 1780. After Camden, Cornwallis
moved into North Carolina, gathering food and horses.
Battle of ne halted at Charlotte, — where the Mecklenburg Reso-
Mountein. hitions of May 31, 1775, were adopted, — while Major
Ferguson, with 1000 tories, scoured the country to the
west, collecting supplies and enlisting recruits ; for that country was
strongly loyal. The whigs fled before him, and alarm spread even
to the transmontane settlements of Watauga and Kentucky. From
this distant region, bands of mounted men, under leaders of their
own choosing, marched eastward, September 26, to bag Ferguson.
Having crossed the mountains, they were joined by 510 North Caro-
linians and 400 South Carolinians, a total force of 1800. Ferguson
heard of their approach and moved toward Charlotte. Thirty-five
miles from that place, he came to King's Mountain, the northern
end of which is cut by the state line. It is a hill sixty feet high,
flat at the top, a third of a mile long, and Ferguson believed it
impregnable. On its top he placed his 900 men and awaited
attack. The whigs were riding hard behind, and October 7, a
picked band of the best mounted arrived at the hill, surrounded its
base, and began a vigorous attack. On alternate sides they
charged up the slopes and then fell back, using whatever cover
they could find. Early in the fight, Ferguson was killed, and at
the end of an hour the white flag was raised: 700 survivors surren-
dered; the rest were slain. It was a small battle, reckoned by the
numbers engaged ; but it was very important. It forced Cornwallis
back into South Carolina, it gave courage to the whigs in the
Carolinas, and it checked the advance of the British until Greene
could arrive and organize his defense. It marked the change of
the tide in the South.
Greene, now in command of the American army, had 2300 men,
half of them regulars. Cornwallis outnumbered him, and all his
f troops were trained soldiers. Greene, therefore, did not
Cowpens. attack, but in his camp at Cheraw awaited the purpose
of his opponents. To encourage the whigs west of him, he
threw out General Morgan with 600 men to threaten the British post
at Ninety-six. This divided the American army, and Cornwallis,
teor
nburg cross ,Creek N
_ Court Hhuse
.1mVU,..^£-(Fayetf1evme)
BOHM4Y t CO., M.T.
THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR IN THE SOUTH
ACROSS NORTH CAROLINA
209
at Winnsboro, tried to get between the two wings. He sent Tarleton
to drive Morgan off to the Northwest, while he himself moved north-
ward. Morgan was an excellent officer and was not to be caught
napping. He had recently been joined by Pickens with several
hundred men, and fell back rapidly. But January 17, he offered
battle at Cowpens. Tarleton's troopers were exhausted by a five
hours' march, but they charged impetuously, thinking the Americans
would flee before them. Morgan's army was drawn up in three lines,
the first a body of skirmishers who were ordered to begin firing when
the enemy was at fifty yards and to fall back on the second line,
composed of 270 militiamen under Pickens. This line was to await
the approach of the British, fire two volleys, and then fall back to
the third, line, which contained 290 Maryland regulars, two companies
of Virginia militia, and a company of Georgians. Morgan had a
total force of 940, and Tarleton had 1150.
When tlie first and second lines began to fall back as ordered, the
British believed the victory won and advanced in disorder. To
their surprise they found the third line in good formation
and resisting them hotly. Thrown into disorder, they
sought to restore a regular line under a rain of bullets,
when Pickens 's men came up on their left flank, while a small
body of cavalry, hitherto out of sight, came up on their right. Finding
themselves surrounded, 600 troopers threw down their arms after
184 had been killed or wounded. The Americans also took some
important stores, and their loss was 72 killed or wounded. The battle
had two important effects : it showed that the Americans could
fight effectively when well led, and it nettled Cornwallis and induced
him to march far astray into North Carolina in an unwise effort to
repay on Morgan the defeat of Tarleton.
The situation was now critical for the Americans, since 125 miles
separated Greene and Morgan, and Cornwallis was between them,
about fifty miles from the latter. Operations resolved themselves
into a race across North Carolina, the two American wings ever
drawing closer together and the British commander bending every
effort to crush Morgan while still detached. Greene knew the danger,
and, sending the left wing northward, rode across the intervening
country and joined the right wing January 30. Morgan was a
soldier by instinct, and his alertness now saved the day. He beat
Tarleton at Cowpens in the forenoon and began his retreat in the
afternoon of January 17. Seven days later he crossed the Catawba.
Cornwallis was then only twenty miles behind, but he had to halt
two days to collect supplies, and when he came to the Catawba,
floods had raised the water so high that he must wait five days before
he could cross. Fifty miles to the northeast is the Yadkin, which
Greene, now in command, crossed February 3, Cornwallis coming up
in time to seize a few of his wagons ; but here again the rising of the
210 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
river gave the Americans an advantage. At Guilford Court House
their two wings united; but Greene did not feel strong enough to
risk a battle, and marched for the Dan river, which he reached safely.
Meanwhile, militia from North Carolina and Virginia had been sent
to him, and with his army raised to 4400 men he recrossed the Dan
and offered battle at Guilford Court House. Cornwallis's force was
only 2200, but it was composed of regulars.
March 15, 1781, the two armies came to blows. The Americans
were in three lines, with intervals of 300 yards. The first was composed
of North Carolina militia, the second of Virginia militia,
Battle of anc[ the third of the continentals, in numbers 4400. On
Co^t°rd either flank was a small body of cavalry. The first was
House. ordered to fire two volleys and retire behind, the third
line; but at sight of the British it fired only a partial
volley and fled. A few of these men, however, joined other bodies
of troops and fought through the battle. The second line gave way
before a bayonet charge, but did not leave the field. Against the third
line, Cornwallis found it necessary to put forth his best efforts. He
was at first driven back, but rallied his troops for a desperate attack,
before which Greene withdrew in good order, but with the loss of his
artillery. The Americans lost 1307, including the 1046 militia who
dispersed to their homes. The British lost 532, and, after vainly
waiting several days to see if the inhabitants would come to the
standard, fell back to Wilmington, where they found a fleet with
supplies. Greene followed for a while, offering battle, but when
Cornwallis's destination became evident, he turned against the interior
posts of South Carolina. The good generalship of Greene and Morgan,
the long and tiresome marches in the North Carolina forests, and the
unwillingness of the inhabitants to join the British, had shown here,
as formerly in New Jersey, that the British could not expect to recover
any other part of the country than that which they held by actual
occupation.
News that Cornwallis was sent back to his ships at Wilmington,
and that Greene was coming to drive Lord Rawdon out of the interior
of South Carolina, aroused the American spirit in that
South C state. It brought grave alarm to Rawdon, commanding
Carolina. m South Carolina, who was at Camden with 1400 men,
while small garrisons held Ninety-six and other posts.
Greene proposed to strike at Camden first, and ordered a South
Carolina force under Marion, Sumter, and Lee to cut the communi-
cations between that place and Charleston and join him for the
final stroke. Meanwhile, he took up his position at Hobkirk's Hill,
two miles from Camden. Rawdon dared not let the two American
divisions unite, and marched out to crush Greene, March 25. Greene
awaited the attack, but was driven from his position after a sharp
engagement. His army, however, was still intact, and Rawdon,
CORNWALLIS IN VIRGINIA
211
after burning Camden, fell back to Monck's Corners, 30 miles from
Charleston. Post after post was now retaken, until at last only
Ninety-six held out in the western counties. Greene besieged it so
closely that Rawdon with two new regiments, just landed
at Charleston, marched to relieve it. Greene raised the
siege and eluded his enemy, who destroyed Ninety-six rather Hill
than undertake to defend it. The British power was now
driven back toward the coast as far as Orangeburg, and against this
Greene, his army recruited to 2600, marched late in August, 1781.
Stewart, the commander, fell back, but was overtaken at Eutaw
Springs, September 8. Greene attacked and seemed to have the
victory, but Stewart rallied his troops .at a brick house and drove the
Americans from the field ; but he was forced to retire, with a loss of
700, to Charleston. In Georgia a similar movement had
resulted in driving the British into Savannah. In General British
Greene's nine months' warfare in the South, he fought four ^J^?
important battles, lost them all, and yet gained, in the ton and
long run, all the results of victory. This singular fact Savannah,
was due to his steady self-control and his ability to
bring his army out of a repulse without demoralization.
While Greene's work thus progressed, the army which he declined
to follow to Wilmington was approaching its doom in Virginia. Corn-
wallis left the Cape Fear, April 25, and, marching leisurely
through eastern North Carolina, reached Petersburg,
Virginia, May 20. Here he found over 3000 British
troops under Arnold, who for five months had marched at will through
the region adjacent to the James river. Richmond and Manchester
had been burned, and Portsmouth had been fortified as a base of
operations. Harrying Virginia, however, did not secure its submis-
sion. When the redcoats had gone, the people resumed their former
defiance. At Petersburg Cornwallis superseded Arnold, and at the
head of 5000 troops turned toward Richmond, where Lafayette,
commanding the American forces, lay with half as many troops.
The British general must have felt that the province was nearly
conquered, since it had in the field to oppose him, at the end of a
five months' campaign, in its very center, no more than 2500 men.
It was, in fact, long marches rather than men and muskets that
put an end to the British power in America.
Lafayette left Richmond as the enemy approached, and Cornwallis
sent Tarleton to break up the legislature at Charlottesville. . The
task was accomplished brilliantly, and Governor Jefferson barely
escaped from his residence at Monticello ere it was surrounded by
the British troopers. Cornwallis, meanwhile, continued to chase
Lafayette in the region north of Richmond. Convinced at last that
the pursuit was useless, he withdrew to Portsmouth, and in August
moved his base to Yorktown, which he fortified. With him were
2i2 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
7000 men. Lafayette, with his forces reenforced to 3500, was between
Yorktown and Richmond.
At this time Washington, with about 6000 men, lay watching Clinton
in New York, and Rochambeau, with 5000, was at Newport. About
the time that Cornwallis moved to Yorktown came a
Cornwallis letter from Count ^e Grasse in the West Indies offering
" the cooperation of his fleet during the summer. Here was
a brilliant opportunity, and Washington seized it. De Grasse was
requested to go to the Chesapeake, blockade Cornwallis, and drive
off a relieving squadron ; Rochambeau, by orders of his own govern-
ment under the command of Washington, was brought to New York,
where, by feigned activity, Clinton was made to believe that he was to
be besieged ; and finally, with admirable celerity, a combined American
and French force numbering 6000 was moved to the head of Chesa-
peake Bay and thence by water to the James river, where it landed,
and, joined by Lafayette, instituted the siege of Yorktown, September
2, 1781. To his great contentment Washington found that De Grasse
was already at hand and that the fleet had brought 3000 additional
French troops who were at his disposal. Thus Cornwallis's 7500
men in Yorktown were surrounded by 16,000 enemies, of whom 7800
were French regulars.
Clinton, alarmed for Cornwallis's fate, sent Arnold with 2000 men
to raid New London, hoping thereby to draw Washington from Vir-
ginia. It was the region in which Arnold was born,
^™ld at but he did not spare it. A part of New London and
London. thirteen ships were burned. Fort Griswold, on the other
side of the river, held off a storming column until resistance
was impossible. When it was taken, Colonel Ledyard, in command,
and nearly a hundred of his men were cut down in cold blood. But
Arnold was unable to penetrate further into Connecticut and returned
to New York, his ships laden with spoils. Clinton also sought to
aid Cornwallis by sea. Admiral Graves, with five ships, sailed for the
Chesapeake. Within the capes was De Grasse, who came out and gave
battle so vigorously that Graves returned to New York much disabled.
Another expedition for the relief of Yorktown was fitted out at New
York, but it sailed too late to be of service to Cornwallis.
Meantime, the siege went on vigorously. The Americans and
French seized the high ground around Yorktown, and their first
line, along the entire British front, was completed by
Yorktown. September 29. Immediately a first parallel was begun,
and then a second, which by October 12 brought the
besiegers to within 300 yards of the British lines. Two redoubts
stood in their way. Since they commanded his own lines, Cornwallis
would not abandon them, and until they were taken, the American
lines could not be advanced. They must, therefore, be stormed, and
the task was divided between the French and the American troops.
CORNWALLIS TAKEN
213
October 14, in the night, a French detachment under Colonel Deux-
Ponts carried one, and an American force under Colonel Alexander
Hamilton carried the other. Cornwallis's defenses were now at the
mercy of his opponents, and he tried to escape across the river to
Gloucester ; but a storm blew his boats down the stream after only
a portion of his force had crossed. His defenses crumbling under the
hot American fire, he could resist no longer,, and on the iyth raised a
white flag and accepted Washington's terms. October IQ, the sur-
render was signed, the land forces becoming prisoners to the United
THE SIEGE OP \\
YOBKTOWN
States and the naval forces prisoners to France. The total number
surrendered, including seamen, was 8000, and 580 of the British had
been killed or wounded in the siege. The combined French and
American loss was 274. At the moment of surrender
Cornwallis pleaded illness and sent his sword by General Cornwallis
O'Hara. By Washington's direction it was received
by General Lincoln, who had been forced to surrender I7gi.
Charleston, and was by him handed back to O'Hara.
After Yorktown the military history of the war is of slight interest.
Both sides realized that the struggle must end with victory for the
Americans. After six years' fighting and at great expense,
England had proved her inability to subdue the country.
Each great expedition into the interior became a failure
when deprived of succor from the coast ; and such would be the result
indefinitely. In confession of her failure, all the Southern posts
were abandoned, one after the other, — Wilmington in January, Savan-
2i4 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
nah in July, and Charleston in December, 1782. In New York
Clinton awaited the result of peace negotiations, which were already
begun.
THE TREATY OF PEACE
The surrender of Cornwallis broke the English resistance. Before
it occurred, the English .nation was tired of a war which only accumu-
lated debt without winning victories. March 5, 1782,
parliament passed a bill to enable the king to make peace.
Fifteen days later Lord North resigned, and the whigs,
under the leadership of Rockingham, formed a new ministry, with the
understanding that American independence should be acknowledged.
It was a bitter pill for the king, whose plans for a personally directed
ministry was staked on the issue of the war. That he had lost was
the only grain of comfort a discerning Englishman could find in the
situation. In July, Rockingham died and Shelburne became prime
minister, but the policy of peace was not changed.
After some preliminary inquiries in reference to the terms likely
to be demanded, negotiations began at Paris in the summer of 1782.
To Franklin, our minister to France, were added, as Ameri-
missioners" can neg°tiators, John Jay, who for a long time had been
fruitlessly seeking to Induce Spain to become an ally of
the United States ; John Adams, minister to Holland ; and Henry
Laurens, a prisoner in England until the negotiations were nearly
completed. Great Britain was represented by Oswald, a Scotch
merchant who was in close communication with Shelburne.
The American commissioners were instructed to proceed in open
cooperation with France, but Jay satisfied himself that Vergennes,
directing the policy of France, would sacrifice the interests
Separate of the United States, and he began to favor a separate
JJJJ0 tl1 5 treaty with England. Personally, Vergennes seems to
England. have been disinterested, but he was under obligations to
Spain, who feared to enhance the power of the new re-
public in the West. In September came from him an informal propo-
sition that the region south of the Ohio be set aside for the Indians,
part of it under the protection of Spain and part under that of the
United States. At the same time it was intimated that at the conclu-
sion of peace, France would support England's claim to the territory
north of the Ohio. This scheme, if adopted, would leave the United
States merely a seacoast power. If it should come before a conference
composed of all the parties to the war, it could not fail to have the
support of Spam and England, and, with France's additional advocacy,
must be adopted. Franklin trusted Vergennes, but the facts of the
case, ably set forth by Jay, induced him to consent to make a separate
arrangement with England, which was pointedly against the instruc-
tions of the American commissioners. An intermediary was sent to
TERMS OF THE TREATY
215
England, where the ministry, glad to settle the difficulty with one
power so that they might be the more free to deal with the others,
fell in with the suggestion, and on that basis negotiations proceeded
smoothly.
Vergennes's conduct has occasioned much discussion. Some
persons have supposed that he wished to keep America dependent
on France, others that he acted in good faith and was unjustly sus-
pected by Jay and Adams. He undoubtedly hoped that
Louisiana would some day come back to France, and this conduct68 *
fact has suggested that he wished to keep the United States
out of the Mississippi Valley in order that it might be more easily
secured by France. The theory, however, does not explain why he
should have been willing to enhance the power of England in the north-
ern part of the valley. Probably the most acceptable explanation is
that he cared little about the disposition of the interior, and merely
accepted the proposed arrangement to please Spain, to whose interest
alone it was that England should have the Northwest ; Vergennes's
indifference in the matter is shown by his calm acquiescence when in
December he learned from Franklin that the American commis-
sioners, on November 30, had concluded a separate treaty with Eng-
land to be effective when peace should have been made between
France and England.
This treaty, after recognizing the independence of the United States,
dealt with four principal heads, each of which had been fully discussed.
The boundary was all we could have desired. On the
northeast it ran up the St. Croix river to the source,
north to the highlands separating the tributaries of the
St. Lawrence from the streams flowing into the Atlantic, thence with
the highlands to the forty-fifth parallel, and along that to the St.
Lawrence. It was then to pass along the middle of rivers
and lakes to the northwest corner of the Lake of the *
Woods and thence due west to the Mississippi, down which it went
to the thirty-first parallel and along that to the Chattahoochee, thence
southward to the source of the Flint, whence it ran in a straight
line to the mouth of the St. Mary's, and thence to the Atlantic. The
British posts within this line were to be given up as soon as possi-
ble. A secret clause provided that if in the general peace England
retained West Florida, its northern boundary should be a line from the
mouth of the Yazoo east to the Appalachicola. The navigation of
the Mississippi was to be open to both nations. No arrangements
were made for running the boundary line, and as geographical knowl-
edge was then imperfect, trouble occurred when the succeeding genera-
tion came to interpret that part of the treaty which referred to the
northeastern and the northwestern boundaries.
The Americans were anxious that the New Englanders should
continue to have their former facilities in the fisheries, and after much
216 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
difficulty it was agreed that the Americans might fish on the Banks
of Newfoundland and wherever else they had been in the habit of fish-
ing, and that they might land and cure fish in any unin-
Fisheries habited parts of Nova Scotia, Labrador, and the Magdalen
Islands, but not in Newfoundland. For this concession, so
important to New England, Adams's pertinacity was chiefly responsible.
On boundaries and fisheries, the treaty thus favored the United
States. On the two other important points of discussion, the pay-
ment of British debts and compensation of the loyalists
British it ought, thought the British commissioners, to favor
Debts and England. But their contention was vigorously resisted.
tionfaTthe" Franklin thought the debts were properly canceled, be-
Loyalists. cause parliament, by closing the American ports and
inflicting the horrors of war, had destroyed the power of
the debtors to pay these obligations. Adams and Jay were anxious
to preserve the credit of Americans, and the demands of the British
were accepted, at least negatively. It was agreed that no legal im-
pediment should be placed in the way of the payment of any debts
owed by American to British subjects. As to compensating the loyal-
ists, the commissioners held out a long time. King and ministers
were insistent ; for they believed that England was in honor bound to
succor those whose fortunes had been seized because they were true
to the crown. The Americans were equally unyielding, because they
looked on the loyalists as wicked conspirators, authors of much blood-
shed, and proper victims of the popular wrath. In one of the dis-
cussions of the subject, the American commissioners said that congress
could not order a state to repeal its confiscation laws, and that the
limit of its authority was to recommend a repeal. The English com-
missioners, anxious to close the negotiations, caught at this expression,
and it was agreed that congress would make the desired recommenda-
tion. The result was a double interpretation. Englishmen, under
the necessity of defending the treaty, assured the public that the ad-
vice of congress would be received by the states as binding. The
American commissioners authorized no such impression. When, as
later happened, the states paid no attention to the advice of congress,
the British public charged the United States with breach of faith.
When this preliminary treaty was announced in parliament, there
was an outburst of anger which produced a change of ministry. Hart-
ley was sent to Paris to replace Oswald, and he was ordered
A General to make better terms. He did his best, but the American
September commissioners would not give more than they had already
3, 1783. promised, and September 3, 1 783, when a general peace was
signed by all parties to the war, the treaty completed on
November 30, 1782, was accepted as defining the political relations
between England and her former colonies. It did not deal with com-
mercial matters, a subject reserved for much irritating discussion in
the future.
POWER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS 217
CIVIL PROGRESS DURING THE REVOLUTION
The continental congress was a revolutionary body, and derived
its authority from the success of the revolution. Since the Articles
of Confederation were not adopted until 1781 the war was
all but won under the sole direction of this body. It The Author-
was composed of delegates chosen and paid by the states, continental
and its votes were generally in accordance with instruc- Congress,
tions from the states. It did not levy taxes, direct or
indirect, but merely made requisitions on the states for funds needed.
It was little more than a convention of ambassadors from states acting
together in a league or confederacy. This loose form of union was
only slightly strengthened by the Articles of Confederation (see page
238). So weak a congress inevitably encountered many difficulties.
It always lacked money and was forced to borrow at home and
abroad and to issue paper currency which eventually became
worthless.
The congress realized its inherent weakness and became so accus-
tomed to it that it almost ceased to struggle against fate. It was
badly organized, though it is difficult to see how a body .
with no more power to make itself obeyed could have pre- JJ congress,
pared a better organization. Each state had a vote, each
was jealous of its own interests, and the defection of any one would
have been a serious calamity to the common cause. Nearly every
vote on a debatable question resulted in compromise, or in a decision
to do nothing. Under these circumstances the personnel of congress
deteriorated ; for the capable men preferred to serve the states rather
than continue to sit in the body of do-nothings in Philadelphia.
The state governments varied in character in accordance with local
conditions, but in New England they were more democratic than
elsewhere. Thus, in New England, the executive was
chosen by the voters, in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland,
Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia by one or both houses
of the legislature, in Pennsylvania by a council chosen by Government
the electors, and in New York by the freeholders worth
£100 or more. No state had universal manhood suffrage. Three,
New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Georgia, required a voter to be
a taxpayer ; other states had a property qualification. The manner
in which the royal governors had interfered in politics, proroguing
assemblies, deferring elections, and continuing in existence houses
which did their will, had created by reaction a strong love of frequent
elections. Accordingly in nine states the governor was to be elected
annually, in New York, Pennsylvania, and Delaware triennally, and
in South Carolina biennially. In six states both houses of the as-
sembly were to be elected annually, and in two more, Connecticut
218 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
and Rhode Island, the lower house was to be chosen semi-annually.
South Carolina elected assemblies biennially, and the other states,
New York, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia elected the lower houses
annually, and the upper houses for longer terms.
In the beginning of the revolution little was said about sovereignty.
The common danger was the great fact of the time, and men were
chiefly concerned about how to secure enough union to
meet it: effectively- But as time passed, and the central
power became more and more a fact, and as a group of
leaders continually urged that it ought to exercise many of the powers
then exercised by the states, a disposition was manifest to define
more closely the powers of the states. Thus arose the contention
that sovereignty rested with states. It was supported by the logic
of the situation. Far larger numbers of people loved the states
than loved the central power. The politicians of the day had been
bred under a system of state politics, and these politicians not only
controlled the states, but they made up the very membership of the
continental congress. The result was seen in the committee of con-
gress which prepared the Articles of Confederation. They voted down
every effort of a few enlightened men to establish a central government
with vital control of taxation, and devised a confederacy without the
right to make its ordinary laws respected. Thus the belief in state
sovereignty got a strong support in the day. We shall soon see that
its inherent practical weakness proved its own undoing.
The state constitutions usually contained bills of rights; for it
was to the state that the citizen was to look for guarantees of life and
property. The pre-revolutionary contention was that
the colonies should not be subject to legislation by parlia-
ment but should make laws for themselves. They were
not now apt to lay aside this contention in order to create
a congress which might take over the function just denied to
parliament. It took years of confusion to make it evident that
the small and disunited states were not able to establish a successful
government in general affairs. At present no such conviction existed,
except in the minds of a few intelligent ones to whom the majority
paid little attention.
It was natural that the government should be republican. So far
as internal feelings were concerned, it had ever been republican. The
monarchy had been, in the minds of the people, an affliction,
tem ilrfier?" a sign of °PPression- Washington, it is said, refused a
ent. suggestion that he might become a king. Nobody will
believe that he was ever willing to be king ; but it seems
certain that if he had appeared in that capacity his popularity would
have dissolved in a day. The example of a numerous people setting
out on a separate course as a nation with the flag of a republic over
them aroused grave apprehensions in Europe. No great nation then
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 219
flew such a flag. Switzerland was not a case in point, since it was
divided by mountains into natural states and protected by its physi-
cal inaccessibility from outside attacks.
The revolution had many leaders from the older politicians, but its
fundamental support was the mass of small farmers. As a popular
movement it aroused the apprehension of the wealthy
classes. It was one thing to establish a republic and Conserva-
another to attempt an absolute democracy. Moreover, RadicafRe-
to hold that all men should participate equally in govern- publicans,
ment was against the practice of any colony. The question
was debated long in the bodies that made the state constitutions, and
the division between democratic whigs and conservative whigs which
then appeared was a forerunner of the party divisions which began
in the first years under the national constitution. The question
hinged on the suffrage and qualification for officeholders. As already
said (page 217), the suffrage was everywhere restricted in some way.
The conservatives were able to force a compromise which gave them
a firmer control of the upper house of the legislature than of the lower
house. In some cases this was by requiring that a member of this
house should own a relatively large amount of property, or that only
well-to-do men should vote for him. In some cases the upper house
was appointed by the lower, and in Maryland it was chosen by an
electoral commission selected for that purpose by the freeholders.
While the war lasted it was not advisable for the whigs to wrangle over
these points, but there came a day when the compromises of the revolu-
tion were no longer acceptable, and one by one the old restrictions on
equal participation in government were removed. This democratic
movement belongs to the history of the second generation after the
revolution (see page 472).
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Students of our revolutionary history are fortunate in having three new narratives
in small compass. Channing, History of the United States, vol. Ill (1912), is in a
very fair spirit and gives economic matters more than ordinary attention; Avery,
History of the United States and its People, vol. VI (1909), is chiefly a military
narrative and its maps are particularly useful; Van Tyne, The American Revo-
lution (1905), is sometimes too brief in military matters, but is very full in civil
affairs and gives us most important glimpses into internal politics during the revo-
lution. Of the older American historians Bancroft and Hildreth still have charm,
but they are unpleasantly pro- American. Fiske, The American Revolution, 2 vols.
(1891), though inaccurate in some details is still the most readable book on the
subject. On the English side the most reliable treatment is in Lecky, History
of England in the Eighteenth Century (1878-1890), republished as The American
Revolution, edited by Professor Woodburn (1898). It is generally impartial,
but does not deal with the political progress of the United States during the war.
A larger work is G. O. Trevelyan, The American Revolution, 4 vols. (1899-1912),
written from the standpoint of the English opponents of George III and generally
in sympathy with the Americans. It is an able work and is very readable. Fisher,
Struggle for American Independence, 2 vols. (1908), is readable and informing.
220 THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION
The published sources are numerous, but the most important are as follows :
B. F. Stevens, Facsimiles of Manuscripts in European Archives Relating to America,
25 vols. (1889-1898) ; Force, American Archives, 4th series, 6 vols., 5th series,
3 vols. (1837-1853) ; Journals of the Continental Congress, new edition by W. C.
Ford and Gailliard Hunt, 21 vols. (1904-), issued by, the library of congress;
The Secret Journals of Congress, 4 vols. (1821), valuable for diplomatic history;
Wharton, The Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence, 6 vols. (1889) ; and Moore,
Diary of the Revolution (1863), a reprint of newspaper clippings. On the British
side see: Calendar of the Journals of the House of Lords (1810) and the Journals
of the House of Commons, 127 vols. (1547-1872); the Parliamentary Register
(1774-1779), The Annual Register for the years concerned; and Almon, Remem-
brancer, 17 vols. (1775-1784).
An interesting and valuable source of information is the correspondence of the
leading men of the day, as : John Adams, Works, 10 vols. (1856) ; John and Abigail
Adams, Familiar Letters during the Revolution (1875) > Dickinson, Writings, 3 vols.
(1895); Jefferson, Writings, n vols. (1892-1900), Paine, Political Writings,
2 vols. (1870) ; and Franklin, Complete Works, 10 vols. (1887-1889). Add to these :
Wells, Life of Samuel Adams, 3 vols. (1865) ; Henry, Life of Patrick Henry, 3 vols.
(1891); and McRee, Life of James Iredell, 2 vols. (1857-1858). Special mention
should be made of Tyler, Literary History of the American Revolution, 2 vols.
(1897), a study of the pamphlets of the period. See also R. H. Lee, Letters (Ed.
Ballagh, 1911-).
Much has been written on the military events of the revolution, and the student
who desires a full bibliography is referred to Van Tyne, The American Revolution
(1905), chap. XVIII. The important general works on the American side are:
Greene, The Revolutionary War (1911), an excellent summary; Carrington,
Battles of the American Revolution, 2 vols. (1876) ; Lossing, Field-Book of the Revo-
lution (1855) ; Dawson, Battles of the United States, 2 vols. (1858) ; Lodge, Story
of the Revolution, 2 vols. (1898) ; Maclay, History of the United States Navy, 3 vols.
(new edition, 1898-1901) ; and Mahan, The Influence of Sea Power upon History
(1890), chaps. 9-14. On the British side see: Fortescue, History of the British
Army, 6 vols. (1899-), vol. Ill deals with our revolution. See also the Public
Papers of George Clinton, 6 vols. (1899-1902).
On the Saratoga Campaign see : Stone, The Campaign of . . . Burgoyne (1877) ;
Ibid., Life of Joseph Brant — Thayendanega, 2 vols. (1838, 1865); Lossing, Life
of General Philip Schuyler, 2 vols. (new ed. 1884) ; Hadden, Journal Kept Upon
Burgoyne's Campaign (1884); and Riedesel, Memoirs (trans. 1868), by the wife
of a Hessian general who served under Burgoyne. The defeated British general
was severely criticized in a Brief Examination of the Northern Expedition in America
in 1777, etc. , which appeared in London in 1 7 79. In the following year he published
his defense in A State of the Expedition from Canada. His most partial champion
is Fonblanque, whose Political and Military Episodes (1876) contains many docu-
ments.
On the war in the South see : McCrady, South Carolina in the Revolution, 2 vols.
(1901-1902) ; Henry Lee, Memoirs of the War (1896) ; Garden, Anecdotes of the
Revolution (1822); Gibbes, Documentary History of the Revolution (1853-1857);
Tarleton, The Campaigns of 1780-1781 in the Southern Provinces (1787) ; Moultrie,
Memoirs of the American Revolution (1802) ; Drayton, Memoirs of the Revolution
to 1776 (1821); Schenck, North Carolina, 1780-1781 (1889); Connor, Life of
Cornelius Harnet (1909) ; Draper, King's Mountain and Its Heroes (1881) ; Johnston,
The Yorktown Campaign (1881) ; Stevens, Campaign in Virginia, 1781, 2 vols.
(1888), reprint of phamphlets in the Clinton-Cornwallis Controversy; Rochambeau,
Memoirs Relative to the War of Independence (trans. 1838) ; and Lafayette, Memoirs,
3 vols. (1837).
On relations with France the best books are: Doniol, Historic de la Partici-
pation de la France a rEtablissement des Etats-Unis d'Amerique 5 vols. (1886-
1900) ; Wharton, Revolutionary Diplomatic Correspondence, 6 vols. (1889) ; Tower,
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
221
Lafayette in the American Revolution, 2 vols. (1895); De Lomemi, Beaumarchais
and His Times (trans. 1857 and 1895) ; Hale, Franklin in France, 2 vols. (1887-
1888) ; Jay, Life cf John Jay, 2 vols. (1833) ; The Correspondence of John Jay,
ed. by Johnston (1830) ; The Deane Papers, 5 vols. (N. Y. Hist. Soc. Collections,
1886-1890); The Lee Papers, 4 vols. (same series, 1871-1874);, and Letters of
William Lee, ed. by W. C. Ford, 3 vols. (1892).
For Independent Reading
John and Abigail Adams, Familiar Letters during the Revolution (1875) ; Frie-
derike Charlotte Riedesel, Letters and Journals Relating to the War of the American
Revolution (1867), by the wife of a Hessian general who1 accompanied Burgoyne
and who wrote intimately of army life and of the country; Roosevelt, Winning
of the West, 4 vols. (1889-1896) ; Thwaites, Life of Daniel Boone (1904) ; Woodrow
Wilson, Life of Washington (1897) ; Withers, Chronicles of Border Warfare (new ed.
1895); Fiske, The American Revolution, 2 vols. (1891).
CHAPTER X
THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
FINANCIAL EMBARRASSMENTS
THE first years of independence were naturally full of difficulties.
An immense debt, state and continental, must be provided for, trade,
interrupted by the war, must be reestablished, the vast
tract.s of western land must be developed, society must be
readjusted on a purely American basis, the bitterness felt
by the patriotic party for the tories must be allowed to cool, remnants
of local jealousies must be dealt with, and the feeling for union, so
weak that the Articles of Confederation were but "a rope of sand,"
must be strengthened and formed into a central government which
could command respect at home and abroad. Many persons felt
that these embarrassments could not be surmounted. They thought
chaos would ensue, and after that would come some violent reorganiza-
tion which would result in two or more states under some kind of
European protection. They did not understand the practical
quality of the Americans, who, through many years, had boldly solved
new and formidable problems, and who, under the lead of men like
Washington, Hamilton, Madison, John Adams, and James Wilson,
discovered a way to bring the people to accept an efficient form of
central government, under which financial, industrial, and social
difficulties disappeared. The years 1781-1787 were full of these
perplexities : the three years following saw them passing away through
the efforts of the people.
The expenses of the revolution were met by taxation, loans, and
issues of paper money. Congress could not lay taxes, but made req-
uisitions on the states, receiving from this uncertain
JiutionaT source half a million dollars a year. From foreign loans
Debt. $7*830,517 was received during the war, and so great was
the distress that of this sum $1,663,992 was used to pay
the interest on the domestic debt. The foreign loans were derived
as follows: from France $5,352,500, from Holland $1,304,000, and
from Spain $174,017. During the next six years over $2,000,000 was
borrowed abroad, most of it to pay the interest on the foreign debt.
Nevertheless, in 1790 we still owed $1,640,071 foreign interest. The
domestic continental loans of the war amounted to $28,353, 832, and
as the interest on these was not paid after March i, 1782, there was
in 1790 an arrearage of this kind of interest amounting to $13,030,168.
FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES 223
The state debts in behalf of the war were very large. Some states
were paying their portions as fast as they could, others were doing
little or nothing in that way. No suggestion of assumption had yet
been made. After the enactment of Hamilton's assumption scheme
in 1790 the national government assumed these debts to the amount
of $18,271,787. The condition of the debt was a blot on the country's
honor and plainly indicated that the tax-laying power of congress
ought to be strengthened.
The first issues of continental paper money were moderate, and for
a year the bills passed at par, but as larger quantities were emitted
they depreciated rapidly. In two years their value as
compared with specie was three to one, by September i,
1779, it was thirty-eight to one, and in March, 1780, fifty
to one, nearly $200,000,000 being then in circulation. Depreciation
continued until the ratio was one hundred to one. In March, 1780,
congress called in the currency at forty to one, to be paid in taxes
and destroyed. It also provided for a "new tenor" issue at forty to
one, bearing interest at 5 per cent. About $120,000,000 was thus paid
in and canceled. After 1790 the government redeemed $6,000,000
more at one hundred to one, and the rest was lost to the holders. The
continental currency became an object of popular contempt, and in
1781 a facetious fellow of Philadelphia plastered his dog with dollar
bills and led him through the streets to1 the amusement of the on-
lookers. The states also issued paper money, about $200,000,000 in
all. It depreciated alarmingly, and much of it was not redeemed.
This large amount of unredeemed money, continental and state, was
a forced contribution from the people who held it, and involved a great
sacrifice on their part for the cause of independence.
The wretched state of the finances brought congress to the verge of
conflict with the army, which in the last winter of the war remained in
camp at Newburg, on the Hudson, watching the British
force in New York while the negotiators in Paris com-
pleted their task. The pay of the soldiers was badly in
arrears, and they began to fear that if they went home without it
they would lose it entirely. Some of the officers inflamed their sus-
picions, and in January, 1783, an address in their behalf was presented
to congress. It contained a veiled threat of misfortune if redress was
not granted. Congress could do nothing more than promise a month's
pay, and the discontent increased.
All this did not occur without arousing keen interest elsewhere.
Gouverneur Morris, assistant superintendent of finance and an ex-
treme advocate of stronger government, declared that
good must come out of the convulsion he thought im-
minent. Hamilton, also hoping for a stronger govern-
ment, but more practical as a public man, hoped that Washington
would take control of the movement and through it force the country
224 THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
to strengthen the hands of congress. He wrote cautiously to Wash-
ington to that effect ; but all his calculations were lost. Washington
was not supple-minded, like Hamilton. He was a man of simple
loyalty, and he considered the threats of armed interference disloyal
and dishonorable.
It cannot be said that men like Hamilton and Morris encouraged the
dissatisfaction of the army, but the holders of the continental bonds
were not so guiltless. This class was strong in Pennsyl-
S^cuiators van^a> Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Hamp-
shire, former trading states where capital was thrown out
of employment during the war. Agricultural states, lacking a market
for their products, were in no position to invest in bonds, but were
more likely to sell what they already had. Thus by 1783 the specu-
lators had bought up the certificates of debt, and the representatives
from the commercial states favored a strong financial policy, while
the delegates from the agricultural states were not so urgent in the
matter. Then the impression got abroad in the army that the capital-
ists in Philadelphia sympathized with the soldiers and would help
them force the delinquent states to their duty. Early in March an
agent of the speculators arrived at Newburg and was closeted with
General Gates, second in command to Washington. On the tenth an
address was secretly circulated, urging the men not to disband until
they were paid, and warning them against any man who would counsel
otherwise. At the same time a meeting of the higher officers was
called for the eleventh.
Washington discovered the plot a few hours before the officers were
to meet and acted with characteristic decision. He published at once
a general order decrying meetings secretly called and
ton's Action. oPenty appointing a meeting for the fifteenth. Gates
was checkmated, abandoned his own meeting, but hoped
to control the one just called, where as senior officer he would preside.
No one thought the commander-in-chief would attend, but the de-
liberations had hardly begun on the fifteenth when he entered and
took the floor to speak. Ordinarily of a quiet manner he was now
agitated and greatly in earnest. He denounced the arguments of
the secret address, assured his hearers that the best exertions in their
behalf would be made, and left the room with the confidence of all
but the chief plotters, many of his hearers being in tears. Resolutions
were then offered full of patriotic utterances and expressing abhor-
rence of the recent secret circular. Gates, in the chair, put the ques-
tion and had the humiliation to announce it was carried unanimously.
Thenceforth the army was loyal. June 2 it was disbanded, and the
soldiers went quietly home, their accounts unsettled, and, as Washington
said, "without a farthing of money in their pockets."
One incident only marred the dispersal. A body of raw recruits
were at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, their pay also in arrears. When
FAILURE OF AMENDMENTS 225
they heard the Newburg army was going home without pay they be-
came mutinous, and eighty of them marched to Philadelphia, vowing
they would have their rights. They were joined by some
veterans, and marched through the streets, drinking, threat-
ening, but attempting no actual violence. Congress
applied to 'the Pennsylvania executive, a Council of State, for protec-
tion, but they replied that they dare not call out the militia lest they
join the mutineers. Then congress adjourned, and after three days
fled to Princeton. Philadelphia declared the flight unnecessary and
thought it was instigated by delegates who wished to deprive the city
of the honor of being the capital of the confederation.
The financial distress of the day suggested a grant of taxing power
to the central government. In 1781 the states were called upon to
amend the articles of confederation to allow congress to
collect an import duty of five per cent. All consented but Two at-
Rhode Island, whose refusal defeated the proposition, tempts to
Her very smallness made her jealous of the loss of author- *^*ss ^~
ity, and her large dependence on commerce made her un- Taxing
willing to surrender a part of what was her surest source of Power,
revenue. Virginia, who assented at first, withdrew her
approval on reflection. The prospect of mutiny in the army led
congress to take up the question again in 1783. This time imposts
were to be laid for twenty-five years on specified articles, the proceeds
to go to paying interest on the debt ; and the plan was to be adopted
if all the states consented. Now was seen how much more the states
clung to their power with the disappearance of danger from England.
Virginia and North Carolina accepted without hesitation, but other
states held back. Impost and no-impost became slogans for two
classes, merchants, owners of the public bonds, and those liberals who
foresaw the advantages of union constituting one class, and the great
body of farmers, shopkeepers, and illiberal persons who believed con-
centration would lead to despotism constituting the other. Interest
and theory were combined on each side. After three years' debate,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New Jersey, South
Carolina, and Pennsylvania had granted the impost, and Delaware
was willing if all the other states granted it. New York, Rhode Is-
land, Maryland, and Georgia held out, or granted it on such condi-
tions that the benefit was slight. The failure of this second attempt
to give the central government authority to collect taxes made a deep
impression on the people, before whom a proposition for a revision of
the articles of confederation was already submitted.
INDUSTRY AND TRADE AFTER THE WAR
Although the war greatly reduced exports of grain, tobacco, fish,
lumber, and rum, and cut off the importation of a hundred useful
Q
226 THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
articles, it did not produce absolute distress. Food and the simpler
articles of manufacture could be had in abundance ; and while men
fought for liberty they would forego finery. They were
Conditions generallv used to hardships and could bear them lightly
when they would. When independence was won it would
be time enough to think of making money.
But peace brought unexpected difficulties. The British ports were
closed to us now as to other foreigners, unless we paid high duties.
Continental ports were open, but England was the great
El nT manufacturing country of the world : it was her implements,
cloths, and other merchandise we were accustomed to use,
and how could we buy them unless we sent her our products ? Have
them we would, £3,700,000 worth in 1784, and as we sent to England
only £750,000 worth in that year there was a mighty draining of specie
to settle the balance. At the same time England laid a high duty on
whale oil, a blow at our whalers, and the trade with the British West
Indies, so lucrative before the war, was now forbidden by the naviga-
tion laws, in order to protect the British merchants and shipowners.
Some men of the day resented the idea that we must trade with Eng-
land. Was not France our friend and her ports open? But every
merchant knew it was not possible to build up trade with France.
We were bred on British commerce, and our taste would not change
quickly. So while trade with the continent and in the Orient grad-
ually reestablished itself, it did not fill the want.
It was, of course, England's interest to keep our trade, but it was
hard to make her realize it. She seemed to think we could not choose
but trade with her. Then retaliation was thought of.
Attitude S B.ut no one dreamed that thirteen states could act effec-
tively against England. It was a task for the central
authority, and in 1784 congress asked the states to grant for fifteen
years the right to pass a navigation law. As England had shown no
willingness to make a commercial treaty, the power was also asked
to exclude from our ports certain goods, the property of citizens of a
nation not in treaty with us. The New England states were earnest
for the measure, the Middle States supported it without enthusiasm,
but the South suspected that it would lead to an advantage for the
trading class at the expense of the farmers. So many restrictions were
placed by the states on the exercise of the power that their votes
granting it were futile.
Then diplomacy was tried. John Adams, in Paris, was appointed
minister to England, with instructions to make a commercial treaty
and secure the execution of the treaty of 1783. He ar-
to London^ rived in London in May, 1785, and was received with
marks of good will by the king ; but the negotiation pro-
ceeded slowly. England understood her advantage. She commanded
the situation and knew it. Why should she give up her ancient
NO TRADE CONCESSIONS FROM ENGLAND 227
system to please America ? Adams replied : " Because it is England's
interest to cherish her trade with America, and if a hard policy is
adopted America will trade elsewhere or build her own factories."
The British merchants flouted the idea: America, they thought,
could not establish manufactures, or trade elsewhere. After eight
months of parley in which no progress was made, an answer came to
Adams's propositions. America, it said, had obstructed the payment
of British debts, contrary to the treaty of peace, and no concessions
would be made, since we did not keep our agreements. Although
Adams remained in London until 1788, he could get no further com-
fort. He was deeply humiliated, and advised that we should not
succeed as long as we collected 10 per cent duty at Boston and
paid as high as 50 per cent at Liverpool. He seemed not to
realize that high duties at home would increase the prices of im-
ported merchandise, lay an extra burden on our own people, and
only injure England by lessening through high prices the amount
of goods we imported from her. Nor was stronger government, as
we now know, a sure cure for the situation, else why did we not re-
taliate after the adoption of the constitution ? The only remedy was
to manufacture our own goods, and it was not until thirty velars later,
after an eight-year period of isolation had intervened (see page
311) that we were able to begin to depend on ourselves in this
respect.
The confiscation of British debts was a serious grievance. These
were obligations of Americans to British merchants incurred before
war began. The English commissioners for making the
treaty insisted that they should be collected, and it was
agreed that congress should recommend the states to
place no obstacle in the way of such procedure. England was also
anxious that the tories should be allowed to live in peace in the states.
But the people were bent on confiscating the debts. England had
made it impossible for the Americans to pay them by establishing a
blockade and sometimes seizing the goods for which the debts were
contracted before they reached the American harbors. As for the
tories, they were much hated because they sided with the enemy in
the war, and because in some states they took part in civil strife
which destroyed much property and life. As trade concessions were
not made and as the Western posts were not given up or the fugitive
slaves restored, Americans took no steps to pay the debts or lessen the
hardship of the tories ; and the question remained a source of irrita-
tion for many years. Meanwhile, the tories moved away to Canada,
where the mother country gave them land and aid in planting them-
selves, and the debtors largely evaded obligations by becoming bank-
rupt and moving to the frontier, where they were lost sight of, and so
escaped suit for recovery of the obligations.
The need of a sound currency turned men's minds to bank notes.
228 THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
Several states had established such institutions on moderate scales,
but they did not answer the requirements of business or give the
central government the facility it required in lending money in
emergencies. This, it was thought, could be furnished
Banks* ""* better by a great national bank, patterned after the Bank
of England. Hamilton suggested such a scheme to Robert
Morris, superintendent of finance from 1781 to 1784. Morris prob-
ably had already formed such a plan in his own mind. At any rate,
he got congress to charter the Bank of North America in 1781, with
a capital of $400,000 paid in specie. It was enlarged to $2,000,000 in
1784. It had many difficulties, but managed to weather them all,
and its notes were received at par. As doubt was cast upon its legality
by repeated assertions that congress had no power to incorporate a
bank, it secured a Pennsylvania charter in 1782, which though re-
pealed in 1785 was renewed in 1787. When the old congress ceased
with the establishment of the new government in 1789, the bank con-
tinued under the state charter. It did not receive recognition under
the new regime, but its existence was uninterrupted, and in 1864 it
became a national bank under the acts then recently passed by con-
gress. In the dark period of 1782-1789 it did good service by lending
money to the government at times when no other resource was ap-
parent. Its first president, Thomas Willing, was an old business
partner and friend of Robert Morris, and gave him steady support in
the many arduous efforts by which the latter, as superintendent of
finance, supported the struggling congress.
FORMING A NEW SOCIETY
The men of the revolution hated nothing more than monarchy and
aristocracy. They realized that every step they took was likely to
be a precedent, and were exceedingly suspicious lest some
Aristocracy °^ ^e dreaded forms should get recognized. Posterity
now thinks their fears were unnecessary. Probably not
even Washington could have made himself king of a people so fiercely
attached to their self-government. As for an aristocracy, which de-
pends on permanent forms of hereditary wealth and rank, it is not
possible that people who had so little of such forms could have toler-
ated their introduction. Primogeniture, which existed in colonial
days in New York and the Southern colonies, and the assignment of
double share to the eldest son in other colonies, were now done away
with. Entails were abolished, and with them went manorial privi-
leges, which had survived in New York and Maryland. The rights
of the proprietors in Pennsylvania and Maryland were seized by the
state, payment to the Penn family being made in the former, but none
to the Calverts in the latter. But unequal suffrage was retained in
one way or another in every state. In some only taxpayers could
OPPOSITION TO THE CINCINNATI 229
vote, in others only the possessors of property. Manhood suffrage
came at a much later day.
Jealousy of rank flared up hotly when officers of the continental
army seemed about to be elevate'd into a superior class. These officers,
whose influence did much to induce the privates to enlist, Half Pay
were promised half pay for life with the advent of peace, for the
The war was not over before a cry arose against executing Officers in
the pledge. It would, said the objectors, create an aris- the Anny-
tocracy of the most dangerous kind, an aristocracy on a military basis.
States passed resolutions, and so much excitement was manifested
that congress commuted the obligation to a payment of five years'
full pay in cash. Even this caused great indignation. Everywhere
the people raged against a standing army, the greatest enemy to liberty.
When it was disbanded in 1783, it was reduced to eighty men, enough
to guard the arsenals at West Point and Pittsburg. Nor could con-
gress be induced to create a stronger establishment. Motion after
motion was rejected to raise a continental force to protect the fron-
tier. The best that could be done was to recommend the states to
raise 700 men for this purpose for one year. In 1788 the total strength
of the army thus raised was 666 men and officers.
The popular dislike of a military aristocracy came to fever pitch
when it was known that the officers before disbanding had formed the
Society of Cincinnati. Its threefold object was to per-
petuate the friendships formed in the war, to deliberate
in secret on the welfare of the country, and to create an
order membership in which should be an honor to pass to the eldest
son to the end of time. It adopted an eagle and a blue ribbon as its
badge, established state and central organizations, and arranged for
regular meetings. The second and third objects of the order aroused
most opposition. The mass of the people resented the idea that a
group of any men, least of all military men, should secretly direct
public opinion on political matters, and they wanted no hereditary
aristocracy however formed. They acknowleged the services of those
who fought for liberty, but felt the merits would be greater if such men
took their places with other patriots in future efforts for good govern-
ment.
The opposition to the order was not confined to the unthinking
people. Franklin, Samuel Adams, and John Adams were among
those who raised a warning voice. They but did in a
dignified way what a thousand less important men did
hysterically. Denunciatory pamphlets were written by
the ton. The society became an issue in the campaigns, and candi-
dates pledged themselves against it in order to get votes. Legis-
latures disfranchised the members of the order, and the citizens of
Cambridge, Massachusetts, petitioned that it be suppressed. Before
such a tempest of invective the Cincinnati could not stand. Mem-
230 THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
bers who had political ambition renounced their allegiance, and others
lost interest in a scheme which was so great a source of commotion.
For a time the meetings were suspended, but in later years they were
revived, and the society now exists as a patriotic order.
The men of 1785 should not be measured by modern standards.
Descended from the middle and lower classes of England, they had
often had occasion to reflect on the disadvantages of a heredi-
Weaf OCial tary aristocracy- It was the English landed gentry that
made up the party in support of the king's prerogative.
The gentry had monopolized offices in state, church, and colonies, and
the aristocracy had furnished a barrier across which American farmers
could never expect to pass. The mass of the colonists, even the
wealthy ones, were descended from those who had felt the burdens of
an aristocracy. Opposition to such a form of society was inherent.
Twenty years of struggle, political and military, had developed their
passions and confirmed their hatred of the words "king," "nobility,"
and "privilege." They controlled opinion among their neighbors
and determined the actions of state legislatures. They were the
average men who were going to build the life of the nation.
Nor did their imaginations rise to the ideal of a great American
nation. They were born into a struggle between crown and colony.
Their first political ideas were to defend the colony against
ti^f states monarchical control. For them patriotism, political
liberty, and self-government began with the defense of the
colony. In 1776 they gave up with reluctance as much of state au-
thority as would enable the states to act together for the continental
cause. When the war was over, they did not cast off their opinions
easily. The states acting together had won independence, and with
the restoration of normal conditions could they not solve the simpler
problems of peace ? And if it should be necessary to strengthen the
general government, they felt it ought to be done with the greatest
care, reserving to the states, which they loved better than any great
coming nation, all power not absolutely essential to future existence.
The state, they felt, was the protector of individual rights, which were
more important than the impression we made on the world as an
American nation. Much inconvenience was endured before their
hold on the popular mind was lessened and a stronger working plan of
union adopted.
Their attitude toward the tories was equally characteristic. They
thought it was for the state to regulate the life of its inhabitants. It
Atti d was ^or ^e state to Decide w^at penalties should be im-
wanTTories Pose(^ on persons who had aided the enemy in time of war,
and who had carried the torch and sword into communities
struggling for their dearest rights. If the states had lost, who could
doubt what punishments would have been visited on the whigs?
Those who took the sword should perish by it. Was it not, therefore,
THE TORIES 231
a mercy to spare the miscreants their lives ? and was it not wise to
insure a homogeneous society in the future by driving away those
who had supported the king's tyranny and still believed a monarchy
the best form of government ?
The lot of the loyalists was indeed hard, especially in New York.
This city was in British hands throughout the war. Its merchants
were largely loyal, and to it came for refuge king's true
subjects from many towns in New England and the Middle
states. While the war lasted, they bore themselves
haughtily toward the whigs of the city, driving them away
to New Jersey or Pennsylvania to escape insults and discriminations,
and seizing their property when they were gone. Now the tables were
turned. The outcasts returned to the city, hot for revenge. With
great difficulty conflicts were averted when the two classes met on the
streets. The legislature disfranchised all who would not swear they
had not aided the enemy. In 1784 it passed a trespass act, giving
the patriots the right to recover damages from tories who had occupied
the houses of fugitive whigs. Many suits at once began, and the
damages claimed were usually exaggerated. One of the first cases
tried was that of a widow, Mrs. Rutgers, against Waddington. Alex-
ander Hamilton, twenty-seven years old, was the counsel for the
defendant, and argued so brilliantly that the court decided that the
trespass act was contrary to law. Then followed an outburst of in-
dignation. Meetings were held, pamphlets appeared, and the press
teemed with threats for the tories who dared to remain in the city.
North and South Carolina had suffered during the war from bitter
internal strife, and here the feeling against the tories was exceedingly
strong. Every state had driven loyalists into exile by law or by irritat-
ing practices which made their remaining unendurable; and the
bitterness of the time yielded slowly to milder feelings. Spite of the
efforts of the British government in their behalf and the interference
of many liberal-minded whigs, the lot of the tories continued very un-
comfortable. They were deprived of the franchise, their property
could not be recovered in the state courts, and large numbers of them,
estimated at 60,000, definitely abandoned their homes and settled
elsewhere in the British dominions. Those who left the Northern
states went chiefly to New Brunswick and Canada; those from the
South went to Florida and the Bahamas. Great Britain felt obliged
to succor them, and by 1790 had given them as much as $16,000,000,
besides large tracts of land. The exclusion of the tories, largely of the
upper class, strengthened the democracy of the day.
THE WESTERN LANDS
Seven of the states had claims to Western lands, founded on the
terms of their colonial charters. They were Massachusetts, Connect!-
232 THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
cut, New York, Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia.
The other states looked with jealousy at the prospect of being swamped
by these mighty neighbors when the lands should be well settled;
and Maryland flatly refused to accept the articles of confederation
unless these claims were relinquished. Promises to that effect were
made before she finally signed, March i, 1781. By 1786 all the claims
to the Northwest were ceded to Congress with the understanding
that when the vast Western region was settled, it should be divided into
states and admitted into the union. Land from colonial times was
the most popular form of property, speculations in it the foundation
of many fortunes, and to the people of the day the possession of these
immense Western tracts added greatly to the national resources, made
the payment of the debt seem more probable, and promoted the union
of the states.
Jefferson, then a member of congress, was deeply interested in these
lands, and was chairman of a committee appointed to prepare a scheme
for settling them. The report, spoken of as the Ordinance
Ordinance8* °^ I7^4' Provided for a number of states, fourteen or six-
0/1784?"° teen> north and south of the Ohio. Nine were marked
out north of the river, and names were selected for them.
One was to be "Washington," another " Sara toga," while others were
given names of classical origin, as " Metropotamia " ("Mother of
Rivers"), for the plain where several rivers rise, and "Sylvania," for
the forest region west and south of Lake Superior. The report also
provided a system of laws to be enforced until the states were admitted
to the union. Its most important provision was the exclusion of
slavery from the Western lands after 1800. Jefferson hoped earnestly
that it might be adopted, but the Carolinas and Georgia thought they
would by this means be excluded from a share in the settlement of the
lands they ceded, and the provision was stricken from the report,
which was then adopted by congress. The scheme was too complete
for the Western conditions. The backwoodsmen who were already
settling in Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee needed a simpler govern-
ment, and this was embodied in a second ordinance which ignored
what had been done in 1784.
In 1787 a newly organized Ohio Company, composed of Massachu-
setts men, asked congress to sell them one million and a half acres of
Ohi ^an(^ °n t^ie Muskingum river for $1,000,000, to be paid
Company. ^or *n tne bonds of the government, then worth less than
50 per cent of par. The application was urged by Manas-
seh Cutler, who proved himself a good lobbyist. He encountered much
opposition from members of congress, who thought the price too low.
Finally he joined with his scheme another purchase, in which the leading
members took part, of 3,000,000 acres at the same price ; and on that
basis the two schemes were enacted. It was proposed to establish
the colony at once, and by spring, 1788, an advance party of 47 began
TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT 233
to build the town of Marietta, the first settlement in what was to be
the state of Ohio.
Just before the grant passed congress, that body hurried through the
Northwest Ordinance of 1787, establishing a government for the
territory northwest of the Ohio. It provided that the
region north of the river should have a governor, secretary,
and three judges appointed by congress; that when the ordinance,
population reached 5000 free men of full age, they should
have an assembly of governor, council, and elected house of represen-
tatives. Not less than three nor more than five states might be made
out of the region, and when any territory had a population of 60,000
it might be admitted into the union with equal status with the older
states. The Ordinance of 1787 became the model for all the other
territories and states carved out of the western domain. It contained
a bill of rights, one feature of which was that slavery should not be
tolerated in the Northwest. The South, which opposed the exclusion
of slavery from the Ordinance of 1784, because it applied to all the
West, made no objection to its elimination from the region north of the
Ohio.
In 1785 congress adopted a scheme for the sale of western lands,
and it was applied to the lands of the Ohio Company. It ordered
that the territory should be laid out in townships six miles
square, or thirty-six sections in a township. Each six- shi® system
teenth section should be reserved for the support of schools,
and the Ohio Company was required to set aside two townships for a
university. This township system has been generally followed in
the West.
Before this time settlements had already been planted in what later
became Kentucky and Tennessee. This region was widely known for
its fertility and abundant game. Hunters went thither,
and, charmed by the country, built huts, established farms, settlements
and fought off the Indians, who bitterly resented the in-
vasion of their best hunting-grounds. The most famous of the ad-
venturers was Daniel Boone, whose efforts opened Kentucky to the
world. Leaving his home on the Yadkin, in North Carolina, he went,
with a small party, to hunt in Kentucky. He loved the country from
the first glimpse, and though robbed by the Indian, and warned to
leave under penalty of death, and deserted by most of his companions,
he roamed and hunted for a year and a half, and then spread such
glowing ideas of Kentucky among the Yadkin people that in 1773 he
set out with a band of settlers for the land of his dreams. Halted by
Lord Dunmore's war he encamped in Tennessee, renewed his efforts
with the return of peace, opened a road into the upper valleys and on
to Louisville, where a trading post had long been established, and soon
saw the country filled with hardy settlers who won their way against
the dangers of Indian attack and the hard struggle of nature. The
234 THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
settlers were within the bounds of Virginia, but felt its yoke lightly.
They were sufficient of themselves for the tasks before them. They
considered the mountains a barrier to permanent connection with the
states of the East, and looked already to the mouth of the Mississippi,
the natural outlet of their trade. Wise men talked of the prospect of
a great valley confederacy which, when strong enough, would sweep
the Spaniard out of the way and take its place as an intracontinental
nation.
What Boone did for Kentucky, James Robertson, with less of
romance, did for Tennessee. By 1772 he had come with some hardy
settlers from North Carolina across the mountains to the
Founded* ^a*r Watauga valley, east of the Cumberland mountains.
They fled from the hard rule of Tryon, who was busy
suppressing the Regulators. When they found they were not in the
bounds of Virginia, as they first imagined, they set up a government
of their own, with rules embodied in a written " Watauga Association."
Many others came to share their lot, and by the outbreak of the revolu-
tion several valleys were dotted with their peaceful homesteads.
John Sevier was of their number, and led them with men from Virginia
and from the upper Yadkin to the victory over Ferguson at King's
Mountain. When North Carolina began the struggle against the
king, they organized the District of Washington and recognized the
state's authority. In 1779 a party from Watauga, led by James
Robertson, began the settlement of Nashville, on the Cumberland,
many miles to the westward, and held it, spite of severe attacks by the
Indians. Thus when congress established the Northwest Ordinance
in 1787, the first work of colonization had already been done by hardy
men acting on their own initiative in the regions which were going to
be the states of Kentucky and Tennessee, but were still under the juris-
diction of Virginia and North Carolina respectively.
One picturesque incident in the West remains to be mentioned.
When North Carolina ceded her western lands in April, 1784, she re-
served jurisdiction over them until they were accepted by congress.
News of what was done brought dismay to the people on
the Watauga and Holston rivers. They wished to be pro-
tected from the Indians, and feared a period of nerveless
government, during which congress would hold them as un-
protected dependencies. To meet this, protect their land titles, and
secure the continuity of orderly government, they launched a move-
ment for a state government. They held meetings of regularly elected
delegates, adopted a constitution, took the name of the "State of
Franklin," chose John Sevier their governor, and asked congress to
recognize them as a state. This happened in the latter part of 1784.
Just at that time North Carolina revoked her act of cession, sent
officers to execute her authority in the transmontane region, and
brought civil war to the very doors of the western people. Congress
PAPER MONEY 235
dared not antagonize North Carolina by intervening, and the people
were unable to defy their eastern masters. At the end of two years
Sevier's term of office expired, and, as no successor was elected, the
" State of Franklin" fell into abeyance. He was then arrested for
treason and sent across the mountains for trial, but friends interceded
and he was not prosecuted. The incident shows the desire of the
western people for self-government and the difficulty of ruling them as
dependencies of the East.
POPULAR DISSATISFACTION
The limitations which most of the states placed on popular govern-
ment (see page 217) caused dissatisfaction, and struggles soon began
to remove them. There was universal fear of a strong executive, and
before the federal constitution was adopted, Massachusetts and New
Hampshire, become a little more democratic, decided to have gov-
ernors chosen by the people, and in 1790 and in 1792 Delaware and
Pennsylvania did the same. In all the states but Georgia the judges
were elected by the assembly or appointed by the governors. In
most of the states it was as if the constitution-makers had erased the
word "king" in the old charters and written the word "assembly" in
its place. Yet this was a long step toward popular government ; for
the assembly represented the will of the responsible people.
This predominance of the conservative classes was not received
quietly in all the states. It gave too much power, it was thought, to
men of property; and parties began to divide between
the rich and the poor. The latter, suffering from the Money De-
scarcity of money, desired to issue paper currency and manded.
urged the assemblies to pass laws to that end. The for-
mer thought of the effect on trade and opposed the demand.
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Delaware Maryland, and Virginia re-
sisted the cry. They all had conservative classes who were able to
keep control of the situation. The victory was hard won in most of
them, especially in New Hampshire, where a mob crying out for paper
surrounded the meetinghouse at Exeter in which the legislators were
assembled in 1786, threatening their lives if the demand was refused.
They were dispersed by the militia, and their cause failed, probably
because it was identified with mob rule. In the other states, seven
in all, paper money was issued.
In Rhode Island the agitation led to serious trouble. The mer-
chants opposed the proposition, but the country people carried it
through the legislature. Then the merchants tried to avoid
the law. They closed their shops and refused to take the Th<;,"
new currency. They were denounced as enemies of the ^
people, and when John Weeden, a butcher, refused in 1786 island,
to sell meat for scrip, he was haled into court. He was
ably defended by Varnum, who urged that the state law violated the
236 THE FIRST YEARS OF PEACE, 1783-1787
constitution and was null. The judges sustained his contention and
dismissed the case. This angered the legislature: they summoned
the judges into their presence and delivered a reproof; and in the
next election all but one member of the court were rejected. But the
decision held, and after a time quiet was restored to the community.
One of the certificates issued by the paper-money party began with
the words, " Know ye," and the party came to be known as the " Know
ye" party. They were ignorant people with real need, but they did
not deserve all the contempt visited upon them.
The farmers of western and central Massachusetts were strong
for paper. They were in debt, and many suits were entered against
them in the courts. They hated the lawyers who prose-
cuted the claims and the rich men in Boston, whose
influence predominated in the legislature. They found a
leader in Daniel Shays, whose fervent appeals stirred them to a frenzy
of rebellion. At Northampton and Worcester they broke up the courts
in order to defer the trial of the cases against them, and elsewhere
they held the quiet people in terror. Finally they besieged the town
of Springfield, and seemed to have the whole western region on their
side. Governor Bowdoin assembled an army of 4400 men under
General Lincoln and sent it against them in the winter of 1786-1787.
Shays fled as Lincoln approached Springfield, but was pursued and
defeated" at Petersham, on February 3, 1787. His men dispersed
and he was captured. Resistance was at an end, but the feeling for
the insurgents was so strong that he was not punished, and Governor
Bowdoin was defeated at the next election by John Hancock, who
as Professor McLaughlin says, " loved nothing better than sunning
himself in the smiles of the crowd." Shays's Rebellion alarmed many
a sober friend of government in every state. It seemed that the foun-
dation of government was breaking up, and that the often predicted
chaos was at hand.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For general works see : Charming, History of the United States, 3 vols. published,
1905-1912; McMaster, History of the People of the United States, 7 vols. (1883-);
Bancroft, History of the United States, 6 vols. (1883-1885), the sixth volume was
formerly published as The History of the Constitution; Hildreth, History of the
United States, 6 vols. (1849-1852) ; Schouler, The United States under the Constitu-
tion, 6 vols. (1880-1894) ; von Hoist, Constitutional and Political History of the
United States, 8 vols. (trans. 1876-1892) ; McLaughlin, Confederation and the Con-
stitution (1905), valuable and modern; Fiske, Critical Period of American History
(1888), the most readable treatment of the subject; Curtis, Constitutional History
of the United States, 2 vols. (1889-1896) ; Avery, The United States and its People,
7 vols. (1904-).
On financial matters see : Dewey, Financial History of the United States (1903) ;
Sumner, Financiers and Finances of the Revolution, 2 vols. (1891) ; Bullock, Finances
of the United States, 1775-1789, (Univ. of Wisconsin Bulletins, 1905) ; Phillips,
Paper Currency of the American Revolution, 2 vols. (1865-1866) ; and Oberholtzer,
Life of Robert Morris (1903).
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
237
On trade relations see : Wharton, Diplomatic Correspondence, 6 vols. (1889) ;
Macpherson, Annals of Commerce, 4 vols. (1805) ; Pitkin, Statistical View of Com-
merce (1816) ; and Coxe, View of the United States (1794).
On the West see : Hinsdale, The Old Northwest (ed. 1899) ; Winsor, The Westward
Movement (1897) ; Barrett, Evolution of the Ordinance of 1787 (Univ. of Nebraska
Papers, 1891) ; Roosevelt, Winning of the West, 4 vols. (1889-1896) ; Adams,
Maryland's Influence on Land Cessions (Johns Hopkins Studies, 1885) ; King, Ohio,
First Fruits of the Ordinance of 1787 (ed. 1903) ; Life, Journals, and Correspondence
of Rev. Manasseh Cutler, 2 vols. (1888) ; Sato, History of the Land Question (Johns
Hopkins Studies, 1886); Garrett and Goodpasture, History of Tennessee (1900);
Pickett, History of Alabama, 2 vols. (ed. 1900) ; and Turner, Western State-Making
in the Revolutionary Era (Amer. Hist. Review, VIII, 1902-1903).
For Independent Reading
Chastellux, Travels in North America, 1780-1782, 2 vols. (ed. 1828) ; Stiles,
Literary Diary, 3 vols. (Dexter, ed., 1901) ; Brissot de Warville, New Travels in the
United States, 2 vols. (1794) ; Roosevelt, Winning of the West, 4 vols. (1889-1896).
CHAPTER XI
MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION
JUNE 12, 1776, the continental congress appointed a committee to
prepare a plan under which the states could act together in the future.
Two schemes came before this committee. One was
Articles of suggested by Franklin in 1775, and provided for a congress
with representation based on population. The other was
Adopted. prepared by John Dickinson, of Delaware, and provided
for equal representation of states. Here appeared the
deep jealousy of the small states for the large ones. The latter clung
tenaciously to their opinion, but yielded for expediency's sake. Every
state was needed in the struggle then beginning, and the smallest was
in a position to win concessions if it only stood firm. The committee
reported July 12, but the matter was deferred, after*a short discussion,
until it could be considered by the states. It came up again in the
autumn of 1777, the delegates having had ample time to learn the
state of opinion at their homes. Again the large states tried to change
the will of the small, and again they failed. A confederation of
equal states was better than no confederation at all. The articles
passed November 17, but they were not to be binding
SmaUStates unt^ approved by all the states. They were a compromise
in which the least progressive side won. As congress
said in submitting them for ratification, it was a difficult and delicate
task to combine "the various sentiments and interests of a continent
divided into so many sovereign and independent communities."
The articles of confederation were designed to give the central
government no more power than it needed to carry on national affairs,
and they reserved all others to the state. Congress was to conduct
foreign affairs, to declare war, to provide for admiralty courts, to
regulate the coinage, to establish standards of weight and measure,
to have sole jurisdiction over Indian tribes, but not to infringe the
rights of any state in this respect, to establish and regulate post
offices and post roads, to build and equip a navy, to issue letters of
marque and reprisal, to have an army made up of troops furnished
by the states at the call of congress, to appoint the higher army
officers, to borrow money, and to emit bills of credit. Most of these
rights had formerly been exercised by the crown, and they were now
238
TERMS OF THE ARTICLES 239
readily granted to the general government. None of them could
have been exercised easily by the states individually.
Some powers were expressly reserved to the states ; as raising the
militia, appointing regimental officers in the army, granting letters
of marque in time of war, repelling invasion without
waiting for the consent of congress, and keeping an army
or navy in time of peace if congress consented. Other
important powers were not mentioned, and by implication were
reserved to the states ; as, to control commerce and navigation, to
levy imposts, and to lay direct taxes. Nine states must consent to
the most important acts of congress, and an amendment of the articles
must be unanimous. Ordinary votes in congress would pass by having
the approval of a majority of the states, but an adjournment could
be ordered by congress if the majority of the delegates present con-
sented. Congress could not levy or collect a tax on _
. ,. ., , ,° ... , . . Revenues,
individuals, but must get its revenues by making requi-
sitions on the states apportioned on the value of land in private
hands; and the state was to collect the amount required as it saw
fit. Thus, the basis of power was the state and not the citizen.
The revolution was a protest against the strong executive in England,
and care was now taken to give the new government the weakest
possible executive. Congress might appoint a president
from their own members to have office for only one year tiye3
in three. He had no veto or appointing power, but
received foreign ministers. Congress was to appoint high executive
officers to act under its authority. Thus it appointed a secretary
for foreign affairs, who reported to congress. A "committee of the
states," one delegate from each of the thirteen, was to carry out the
directions of congress in a recess of that body.
Another weakness was the absence of a federal judiciary. No
such courts were provided. Cases arising under the articles would
be referred to the state courts, which would naturally
lean toward the states. Admiralty courts, however,
should be established by congress with jurisdiction over
piracy and over offenses on the high seas, and there was a. court of
appeals for prize cases. A dispute between states was to be referred
to congress, who should appoint seven or nine arbiters, no two from
the same state, who were to pass on the dispute and report their
verdict to congress ; but there was no way of enforcing the decision,
if the contending states did not choose to obey it. The articles
declared in the beginning that "Each state retains its sovereignty,
freedom, and independence," and described the government now
created as "a firm league of friendship," but near the end they say,
"and the Union shall be perpetual." In view of the narrow power
given to the congress, we may conclude that the word "Union*
here was understood to be a mere act of association. The historical
24o MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
significance of the articles of confederation is not to be overlooked.
They were a step in the development of the union. Weak as they
were for the purposes demanded of them, they were a conscious
sacrifice of some of the powers of the hitherto disunited states, and
their very impotence pointed out in what respect they ought to be
strengthened.
MOVING TOWARD A STRONGER UNION
The weakness of the articles surprised nobody. Even the men
who opposed a strong union were not surprised. They had resisted
concentration because they feared the power of a strong
t°PUnh>n°n central government over the states. The four years
Receding. °f turmoil following the victory at Yorktown showed them
that there was something worse than a vigorous congress.
They saw in the financial chaos the obstruction of trade, and in the
tendency of states to fall on one another the probability that even
the small amount of union already established would be lost. If
such a state of affairs continued, it was likely that each state would
look out for itself. In such a condition the large states would fare
best, and small states would either fall into the hands of their great
neighbors or have to place themselves under the protection of foreign
powers. It was, therefore, the interest of small states to give up some
of their reserved powers, provided they could effect an arrangement by
which they could preserve their integrity as states.
Meanwhile, the strong union men did not cease to try to develop
public opinion. Chief among them was Washington, who wrote
letters to his friends and to legislatures. Hamilton,
Active a^SOj exerted himself, and Madison, who was coming
into great influence in Virginia, was another who lost no
opportunity to help the cause. After the fashion of the day, many
pamphlets appeared on the question, one of the most important
being by Pelatiah Webster, suggesting so many features of the con-
stitution later adopted that his .admirers have called him the father
of the constitution. Congress itself took up the work, and passed
several sets of resolutions looking to a stronger government. Few
of these advocates desired a unified government: most of them
looked to a federal government, with power to collect its revenues
and to make itself obeyed. Some men said that all that should be
done was to add to the central authority the least possible vigor the
situation demanded. All these efforts made ready for the work
of 1787.
As the discussion went on, the idea of amending the articles in a
convention continually came up. It was plain that the method in
the articles themselves was futile ; for one state would probably be
found to oppose anything suggested. But a convention would not
be bound by the existing agreement, it would build the union anew,
A CONVENTION SUGGESTED 241
and if an agreed number of states accepted its work, the union
might go forward without the consent of the others. Besides, to
take part in it would commit no state, and if it should
be held it would be the interest of each state to be repre- Constitu-
sented, lest the plan prepared should infringe her interests, ^tion °n~
As the suggestion of such a step was repeated it gained Suggested,
ground in the popular mind. Many of the discouraged
friends of central government thought it worth trying, and the friends
of the states were willing to attend and discuss the points at issue,
although they were quite sure they would not yield one iota of their
cause more than was necessary to preserve the fruits of the revolution.
In all this congress took little active part. It could hardly be expected
to do a thing that would destroy its own life.
While opinion thus ripened, events happened which led to the
convention. In 1784 Madison learned that much confusion in navi-
gation and some smuggling existed on the Potomac
because of different customs regulations on the opposite
sides. He undertook to remedy the matter, and got the
two states concerned to appoint commissioners to prepare
a code of rules. They met in 1785, had no trouble to agree on the
matter in hand, but saw that if Maryland changed her regulations,
her northern neighbors must do the same, or the same difficulty
would exist on the northern border. This would necessitate changes
on the northern borders of Pennsylvania and Delaware. In other
words, the regulation of navigation was a question common to all
of the states, and the commissioners ended by suggesting a general
convention for that purpose. Madison, one of the commissioners,
was a member. of the Virginia legislature, where he worked hard to
strengthen the hands of congress. A strong party opposed his efforts,
because of their devotion to the sovereignty of the states. Spite
of their plans, he got the assembly to call on all the other states to
send delegates to a convention to consider commercial regulations.
The place was to be Annapolis, remote from New York, where congress
then sat, and far away from any large port whose merchants might
influence its deliberations. The time of meeting was to be September
n, 1786. This convention, be it remembered, was to be a creature
of the states, to report to them, and was not concerned with the
continental congress.
At the appointed time delegates assembled from Virginia, Penn-
sylvania, Delaware, New York, and New Jersey; and Massachu-
setts, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and North Carolina named
delegates who did not attend. The other states, Georgia,
South Carolina, Maryland, and Connecticut, took no
notice of the call. More discouraging than these absences
was the fact that no real good could be accomplished
unless a power existed strong enough to enforce common regula-
242 MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
tions, if they were made. The convention, therefore, gave up the
task before it and issued an address to the states urging them to call
a constitutional convention to meet in Philadelphia the second Monday
in May. Its action was to be binding when approved by congress
and confirmed by all the state legislatures.
This was a boM step. Congress was only half pleased, and took
no notice of a call coming from a source outside of itself. But Virginia
was of another mind. Spite of her recent opposition to
Delhgphii amendments, she now indorsed the convention without
deiphiaCon- debate and elected delegates, among them Washington,
vention. Madison, Patrick Henry, and Governor Randolph,
but Henry refused to serve. Other states followed her
lead, and congress unbent enough to call a convention at the same time
and place, but without allusion to the work at Annapolis. Rhode
Island alone refused to take action, although New Hampshire hesi-
tated until June, and her representatives took no part in the earlier
deliberations at Philadelphia. The quick response of the other states
was in strong contrast with their opposition to amendments. Though
disgusted with congress, they were loyal to the American cause and
hoped with a new trial to make a better form of government than they
then had. For this purpose they put forward their best men. The
American congress had not contained, since the first days of its exist-
ence, such men as gathered at Philadelphia; Benjamin Franklin,
James Wilson, Gouverneur Morris, Alexander Hamilton, Rufus
King, William Patterson, Oliver Ellsworth, Charles, and Charles
Cotesworth, Pinckney, and Luther Martin. Though divided in their
opinions, they were among the best leaders of the day, and no superior
men could have been found for the task before them. .
Washington was chosen president of the convention, and the
meetings were held in the strictest secrecy. At the close the journal
was delivered to him sealed with instructions to hand
theCo^- it: over to the congress of tne United States, if the consti-
vention. tution now prepared was adopted. In 1818 congress
ordered its publication, but it was the merest skeleton
of the proceedings. A fuller record was made by Madison, the best
versed member in political science, and such an earnest supporter
of the practical measures of the convention that he came to be called
"the father of the constitution." At the first session he took a seat
from which he could hear all that was said and made as full a record
Madis n' °^ ^ debates as he could. His "Notes" were first
" Notes." published in 1841, and constitute our best information
of what was done. Other members, particularly Yates,
of New York, made notes less explicit, and these also have been
published.
The opposition between large and small states came up with the
meeting of the delegates. Four days after the convention organized
LARGE AND SMALL STATES 243
Governor Randolph, of Virginia, offered a tentative plan of union.
It favored the large states and provided for a congress of two branches,
the lower elected by the people on the basis of population
or land values and the upper elected by the lower
branch. The significance will be seen if we remember
that by the first census, 1790, Virginia had a population of 747,610,
Massachusetts, including Maine, had 475,327, Pennsylvania had
434,373, North Carolina had 393,751, and New York had 340,120.
The combined population of Rhode Island, Delaware, New Jersey,
and New Hampshire was only 453,943. The combined population
of the five largest states was 2,391,181, and that of the other eight
states was 1,334,238. Georgia, with a population of 82,548, had
vast undeveloped areas and usually acted with the large
states, so that these six great states had 66. i per cent, of the J^f ** °rn ° f
entire population, and since the other states had restricted state"**
boundaries, the progress of settlement could be expected
to increase their advantage. If land values were taken for the basis
of representation, the distribution of power would be nearly the same
as if population were taken.
The congress thus delivered over to the large states should have
authority to make all the laws the existing confederation could make,
as well as to veto a state law in conflict with the consti-
tution, and to coerce a state failing in its duty. There Congress
was to be, also, a national executive chosen by congress, Virginia
but its composition was not defined. There was to be a pian.
council of revision, of which the executive was to be a part,
with power to veto a law of congress or a congressional veto of a state
law ; but its veto might be overridden by a subsequent session of con-
gress. There was to be a national judiciary selected by congress
with jurisdiction over admiralty cases, issues in which foreigners or
citizens of different states were parties, impeachments of national
officers, and cases concerning the collection of the national revenues.
It was also provided that officers of the states should be required to
take oaths to support the constitution of the union, and that the con-
stitution when completed should be submitted to the people of the
states for approval through their legislatures or conventions chosen
for the purpose. This plan, which was largely the work of Madison,
was distinctly popular in its character. It was supported because
a popular basis of government favored the large states, and it had the
opposition of the small states for the same reason. Pinckney, of
South Carolina, submitted a plan, much like Virginia's, but the
convention took little notice of it. Alexander Hamilton also had a
plan as strongly central as Virginia's, but he did not submit it to
the convention.
The debates began in the committee of the whole. The Virginia
plan had the solid support of the large states, except New York,
244 MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
which, under the influence of George Clinton, thought to hold out
for special terms. Six of the eleven states represented, — Massa-
chusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South
cesses of "the Carolina, and Georgia, — over-riding the arguments of
Large states tne small states, carried the main features of that plan
through the committee. They were in no mood to com-
promise. If the small states would not federate on the proposed
plan, said Wilson, the most masterful of its defenders, let them know
that the large states would federate on no other. And the small states,
not prepared for such a spirited assault, could only repeat their
assertion that they would not put their heads into the lion's mouth.
Their leader was Paterson, of New Jersey, as determined a man as
Wilson himself. He thought it better to remain out of the union than
to accept the domination of the victors; and one need only look
at the map to see that a group of states around New York harbor,
from Connecticut to Delaware, could have laid the foundation for
a great independent federation if they had thrown in their fortunes
in a common cause.
When the committee reported to the convention, Paterson, there-
fore, offered the ultimatum of the small states, itself a plan of govern-
t ment. He was willing to strengthen the hands of congress,
pfanfS< to a^ow it to lay and collect import duties, to regulate
trade, and to coerce a state which did not pay its requisi-
tions. He would even grant a national judiciary with large powers,
but he would not agree to distribute power according to population,
and he demanded equal representation of the states in congress.
Had the minds of the delegates been free from passion they would
have seen that even this was a great improvement over the articles
of confederation: it would have remedied most of the abuses under
the old system. But the question was now beyond the mere fact
of remedying abuses ; it was : Should a nation be founded on a popu-
lar basis or on a state basis? and around that fundamental point
began a discussion whose acrimony made every cautious and patriotic
delegate tremble for the issue. After five days the vote was taken.
Maryland was divided, and Connecticut, in sympathy with the small
states but not willing to defeat union, voted against the ultimatum.
Thus the large states again won, the vote being seven to three against
Paterson's plan, and the convention took up the report of the com-
mittee of the whole.
June 29, came the first division on the make-up of
Fight over congress. It was voted to have proportional represen-
upof< Con- tation in the lower house, Maryland being divided and
gress. New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Delaware voting
in the negative. It was a critical moment. If the same
combination carried the vote on the composition of the upper house,
the small states, if they fulfilled their threats, would abandon the
A COMPROMISE 245
convention. Wilson was inexorable. " If the minority of the people
of America," said he, " refuse to coalesce with the majority on just
and proper principles, if a separation must take place, it could never
happen on better grounds." To which a Delaware delegate replied:
"The large states dare not dissolve the Confederation. If they do,
the small ones will find some foreign ally of more honor and good
faith, who will take them by the hand and do them justice."
Fortunately, there were some moderate men in the convention who
thought a compromise better than disruption. Several times in the
debates small-state delegates had suggested that at least
the upper house should be based on equal representation
of states, and no notice had been taken. But at this
critical point the idea recurred to the small-state men, and promise.
Ellsworth, of Connecticut, pleaded eloquently for it as
a guarantee to the small states that they should not be swamped
by the influence of their large neighbors. It seemed a small concession
in order to preserve the union of all the states. The appeal reached
one man, Baldwin, of Georgia, Connecticut born and a Yale graduate.
On the vote being taken, he was for compromise, and
divided his delegation, thus leaving the large states with Q^^"' °f
only five votes. At the same time Luther Martin's
colleague was absent, and he cast Maryland's vote for the resolution.
The vote in convention was, therefore, five to five, and the power of
the large states was checked. The pathetic appeal of the small
states at the last had reached the hearts of some of their adversaries,
and a committee of one from each state was appointed to arrive at
a compromise. Franklin was a member, and suggested the report
that the lower house be based on representation and have the right
to initiate revenue laws, and that the states have equal voice in the
upper house. After eleven days of bitter debate, with many futile
motions to amend, the report was carried, North Carolina voting for
the compromise. Four large states held out, Pennsyl-
vania, Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia, while Massa-
chusetts was divided. They took defeat badly, and asked
for an adjournment to consider what they should do. Everybody
left the hall in the deepest gloom. The event had come which the
larger states had said would justify withdrawal : would they carry
out the threat ? Early next morning they held a meeting to decide
upon their course. Some were for withdrawal, but the majority were
for remaining. They were not willing to give up the last hope of
a united government. Thus the compromise was allowed to stand
and constitution-making was resumed.
The compromise had vast influence on the future. It broke at a
vital point into the scheme of a national government on a popular
basis. It divided the lawmaking power between two dissimilar
and, in some cases, opposing sources of authority. If the large states,
246 MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
four of whom were Southern, had won in 1787, slavery would not have
found refuge in the senate fifty years later, and the secession move-
ment might have been dealt with before it was strong
fluence in enough to venture its cause on the field of battle. The
the Future, equality of the states in the senate nourished the seces-
sion movement through three decades of its early growth.
This compromise was soon followed by another. Congress was
given power to lay direct taxes to be apportioned according to popu-
lation, and representation was to be based on population.
Three-fifths gmce the slaves did not vote, some Northern men thought
Slaves ^ey snould not be counted in representation, it being
Counted. logical to found political power on citizenship. They
also thought that slaves should be included in appor-
tioning direct taxes, because they were property, and taxation should
rest on the ability to pay. The South opposed each proposition.
Williamson of North Carolina suggested that three-fifths of the slaves
be counted in representation. There was some sharp debate, showing
the deep feeling of the North against the advantage slavery gave
the South and the resentment of the South that it should be a basis
of discrimination against her. At the end a compromise was adopted,
three-fifths of the slaves being counted in apportioning both repre-
sentation and direct taxes.
Still another adjustment of conflicting interests was to be made.
The four states south of the Potomac were agricultural, and all the
others had strong commercial interests. Since the states
Co'nn}erce were to be equal in the senate, the South, remembering the
Foreign British navigation acts, feared that the North might corn-
Slave Trade, buie to make discrimination against the non-commercial
section. They, therefore, hesitated when it was proposed
to give congress control over commerce. At the same time the regu-
lation of the slave trade came up. Virginia and Maryland had as
many slaves as they could profitably employ, and there was no popular
demand for more. Their leading men saw the evils of the system and
would have been pleased to eliminate it. They joined with the men
of the North in a desire to forbid the foreign slave trade at once.
This alarmed South Carolina and Georgia, where slaves were more
profitable. The people of these two states looked with hope to the
settlement of the Gulf region, where rich lands awaited development
through slave labor. Georgia and South Carolina, therefore, objected
to an immediate checking of their slave supply and a consequent
enhancement of slave prices. Here again came a warm debate in
which the southernmost states resorted to the usual argument that
they would not federate if their interests were overridden. They had
the sympathy of North Carolina, and it was evident that a powerful
state could be formed if the three, with the vast Gulf section, set
up a government of their own. Finally the spirit of compromise
THE CONSTITUTION BEFORE THE PEOPLE 247
prevailed. Congress was given control of navigation, which satisfied
the North, and it was agreed that the foreign slave trade should not
be prohibited before 1808.
Other points of difference appeared in the convention, but they
concerned the theory of government, and not the interests of the
parts of the union. They were usually won by the advo-
cates of a national government. Thus the powers of
congress, methods of election, the functions of the execu- completed,
tive, the creation of a system of federal courts, the powers
denied to the states, the methods of amending the constitution, and
other similar points were passed upon after much contention. The
sessions lasted until September 17. Of the fifty-five delegates who
had attended, only thirty-nine were present and signed : some of the
others had gone home in disgust to oppose adoption when the com-
pleted instrument should appear before the states. Probably few
of its supporters believed it was all it should be, but they held it was
better than the old system, and they believed time would show its
defects and lead to amendments. These, also, went to their homes
resolved to do what they could to secure adoption.
THE ADOPTION OF THE CONSTITUTION
The country waited anxiously while the convention deliberated
behind closed doors : it was in commotion as soon as the constitution
was published. As the members returned to their con-
stituencies full of arguments for nationality, the immediate ^People
response was enthusiastic. The people were accustomed
to follow leaders, and the federalists, as the advocates of nationality,
had the advantage of early organization. Newspapers teemed with
articles on both sides, speeches were made, and pamphlets appeared.
The most notable utterance was a series of papers by Hamilton,
Madison, and Jay, under the title of "The Federalist," then and to
this day an excellent summary of the meaning of the constitution.
On the other hand, some of the most prominent men of the day began
to denounce ratification. They favored a stronger government
than the old confederation, but they thought the suggested plan too
national. They slowly rallied their following into a group known as anti-
federalists, and by speaking and writing urged that the liberty of indi-
viduals would be destroyed if the powers of the states were reduced.
In the convention the small states were the champions of state
rights, but now they were most eager to ratify. They had won their
fight in regard to the composition of the senate, and made
haste to " come under the roof," as the phrase ran. Dela- |^}gca
ware ratified first, December 7, 1787, New Jersey on the tions>
1 8th, and Connecticut on January 9, 1788. The first large
state to act was Pennsylvania, where the antifederalists appeared in
248 MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
strength. They fought so well that a compromise was adopted. The
federalists agreed to ten suggested amendments which should be
submitted to congress, in the hope that they would be referred to the
other states for approval; and on that basis the constitution was
accepted on December 12. January 2 Georgia ratified unanimously.
By this means five states accepted the new government within a month
and two days, and the federalists were much encouraged.
In Massachusetts the antifederalists were strong in the interior
towns where distrust of the merchants and capitalists of the seaports,
now generally federalists, had been marked since the days
of Shays's rebellion. All eyes turned to John Hancock and
Ratifies. Samuel Adams, who had much influence with the popular
party. They were both known to hesitate, but the former
was won over by the promise of support for either the presidency or
vice-presidency in the new government. The latter could not be
so easily convinced. He was devoted to his state and thought her
interests were sacrificed. In the convention Hancock was induced
to offer a number of proposed amendments supporting the rights of
the states. Adams announced that he was satisfied, and on February
7 ratification was carried by the relatively small majority of 19.
The Pennsylvania amendments had been in the nature of a bill of
rights, and were considered a safeguard of personal liberty : those
offered by Massachusetts went farther and sought to lessen nationality
and strengthen the states. Without them it is doubtful
ofgthe °anCe if the °1(? Bay S^ate would have accePted the constitution.
Amend- ^e antifederalists pronounced them a subterfuge and
ments. asked who was so simple as to believe that attention would
be paid to amendments once the nationalists got the
government established to their liking? and would it not be more
sensible to announce that they would not ratify until the amendments
were adopted ? The federalists replied that if the constitution were
now rejected, there was slight hope that the states could be got to
consider it again. Their success in urging amendments as a means
of overcoming the arguments of the Massachusetts antifederalists
induced them to use it in all the states who later raised strong objec-
tions. Of the seven states voting after this all but one ratified with
amendments. The consent of Massachusetts determined New
Hampshire, who at first adjourned her convention to
States. see wnat ner great neighbor would do. April 26 Mary-
land ratified, and South Carolina on May 23. This made
eight states, and by the constitution the new system was to go into
effect when nine had ratified. Which would be the one remaining
necessary accession ? The question was answered when on June 2 1
New Hampshire accepted the constitution.
Before the South knew of New Hampshire's action Virginia, after
a hard and doubtful battle, had decided for union. Although the
VIRGINIA AND NEW YORK 249
state's delegation voted steadily for nationality in the Philadelphia
convention, in no ratifying convention was there a harder fight
against nationality. It was led by Patrick Henry, who Vif
had refused to go to the convention as a delegate. He
opened the attack in the Richmond convention by boldly proposing
to call to account the Virginia delegates, Washington included, on
the ground that they had been untrue to the state when they made a
plan for a national government. He was supported by George
Mason, a delegate who refused to sign the constitution, and by R. H.
Lee, leader of a group of disappointed men who long opposed the
policy of the great planters in eastern Virginia. They attacked the
constitution at every possible point. It would make a tyrant of the
president, it would enslave the states, it would destroy individual
liberty : these and other arguments were marshaled by the impetuous
Henry with dramatic force. Madison and John Marshall met his
arguments coolly. The proposed plan, they said, left the states with
all necessary powers over local affairs and gave the union only what
power was needed to direct the affairs common to all the states. At
the end of three weeks of excited debate amendments were brought
forward, forty in all. Henry laughed at them. They were designed,
he said, to lull the fears of the antifederalists, but once adoption was
secured they would not be heard from again. Madison replied with
a pledge that they should be fairly considered and submitted to the
states. The promise was trusted by some members of the convention
who were in doubt, and ratification was carried on June 25, 1788,
by a majority of ten.
Ten states had now "come under the federal roof," and the battle
shifted to New York, where George Clinton led the antifederalists.
When the convention met in June a majority of the N Y
members were with him. Hamilton, Jay, and Robert R.
Livingston led the federalists with great ability. The same argu-
ments used in the other states were bandied back and forth; but
when it was known that ten states had ratified, the situation changed.
New York was not willing to be left out of the union in company
with Rhode Island and North Carolina. Some antifederalists now
became discouraged, and when the vote was taken, July 26, the
federalists won by three votes. A resolution was passed asking con-
gress to call a new convention to consider a constitution. It won some
votes for ratification, but it elicited no response from either congress
or the other states. Everywhere men were tired of the discussions
of the past year and were willing to test what had been won before
they began to revise it.
Two states now remained out of the new union, North Carolina
and Rhode Island. In the former a convention was held, controlled
by the antifederalists. It was decided to adjourn without action.
The leaders hoped that other states would do the same and be able
25o MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
to force the union to amend the plan adopted. Rhode Island
submitted the constitution to the people, who rejected it by a
large majority. After the new government was organ-
North Caro- ized these two states became ashamed that they were
Rhode Is- without the fold, and accepted the constitution, the
land. former on November 21, 1789, and the latter on
May 29, 1790.
NATIONALITY AND STATE INTEGRITY IN THE CONSTITUTION
There is a trace of nationality in the articles of confederation,
but the constitution has a great deal more. By it the legislature
may do the following things: i. Lay and collect taxes,
Congress. direct and indirect, "to pay the debts, and provide for the
common defense and general welfare of the United States,"
but taxes must be uniform throughout the union; 2. Regulate
foreign and interstate commerce; 3. Pass naturalization laws;
4. Pass uniform bankruptcy laws; 5. Enact copyright and patent
laws; 6. Raise and support an army ; 7. Call out the militia to execute
the laws of the union, suppress insurrection, or repel invasion;
8. Have exclusive control over the district, not more than ten miles
square, to be selected for the national capital ; 9. Buy with the consent
of the state in which they lie sites for forts, arsenals, and other
public works and buildings, and have exclusive control of the same ;
10. Make laws to carry into effect any of the powers granted to it
in the constitution; n. Suspend the writ of Habeas corpus when
necessary in cases of rebellion or of invasion; 12. Determine the
times and places of choosing presidential electors; 13. Judge of the
validity of the election of its own members, each house acting for
itself; 14. Dispose of and govern the territory and other property
of the United States; and 15. Admit new states into the union,
but no state to be divided without its own consent. Of the powers
granted to congress by the articles of confederation the following
were reaffirmed: i. To establish and control post offices and post
roads ; 2. To borrow money ; 3. To coin money and fix the standards
of weights and measures; 4. To define and punish piracies and
felonies on the high seas; 5. To create and maintain a navy;
6. To make rules for the regulation of the army; 7. To declare
war ; and 8. To grant letters of marque.
The composition of congress is as follows : i. A house of represent-
Composition a^ves> composed of not more than one representative for
of Congress. eacn 3OjOo° inhabitants and each member to be chosen
i. The every two years ; but each state must have at least one
House of representative. In apportioning representation and direct
Representa- taxes three-fifths of the slaves and all the whites shall
be counted. Each representative must be at least
LEADING FEATURES OF THE CONSTITUTION 251
twenty-five years old, seven years a citizen of the United States,
and a resident of the state from which he is chosen. The
house of representatives elects its own officers and has sole right
of impeachment. It originates all bills for raising revenue, but the
senate may amend them.
2. The senate, composed of two members from each state chosen
for six years by the state legislatures, each member to have one vote.
One-third of the members are chosen every two years.
Each senator must be at least thirty years old, nine g'enate
years a citizen of the United States, and an inhabitant
of the state from which he is chosen. The vice-president presides
over the senate but has no vote unless there is a tie. The senate
tries impeachments, but when the president is impeached the chief
justice presides, and a two-thirds vote is necessary for all convic-
tions. It also confirms the appointment of officers nominated by the
president and by a two-thirds vote ratifies treaties. It chooses
a president pro tempore to preside when the vice-president is absent
or fills the office of president.
Congress shall meet in regular session at least once a year, on the
first Monday in December, or on some other day selected by itself.
The state legislatures shall direct the time, place, and Elections
manner of electing members of each house, but congress
may, if it wills, make other regulations for choosing senators and
representatives. All persons vote for representatives and presidential
electors who vote for members of the most numerous branch of
the state legislature. Each house is judge of its own elections, each
elects its own officers, each prescribes its own rules of procedure,
and each must enter the yeas and nays in its journal when one-fifth
of the members present demand it. No member shall
be called to account for words spoken in debate or arrested
during attendance on the sessions, except for treason,
felony, or breach of the peace. Each bill to become a law must
be passed by each house and signed by the president of the United
States, but if he vetoes it, congress may pass it over his veto by a
two-thirds majority. If he keeps it ten days without _. „
either veto or approval, it becomes law. If he receives
a law within ten days before adjournment and does not act upon it,
the bill is not law. Congress may not create a title of nobility, and
no federal official shall accept a foreign title or present without the
consent of congress.
The executive function is exercised by a president of the United
States chosen for four years by electors appointed by
the states as they may see fit. Each state is to have ™*t
as many presidential electors as it has representatives
and senators, and each elector has one vote. The selection of elec-
tors may be regulated by congress. The president must be a natural-
252 MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
born citizen of the United States, at least thirty-five years old, and
for fourteen years a resident of the United States, and he shall take
an oath faithfully to execute the office and to defend the constitution.
His powers are defined as follows: i. He shall be cominander-in-
chief of the army and navy; 2. He shall make treaties with the
His Powers concurrence °f two-thirds of the senate ; 3. He shall
appoint ambassadors, judges, and other officers with the
consent of the senate, and, if congress gives him the power, inferior
offices of his own accord ; 4. He shall call congress in extra session ;
5. He shall receive ambassadors and conduct negotiations with
foreign states; 6. He shall see that the laws be executed; 7. He
shall be liable to impeachment for "treason, bribery, or other high
crimes and misdemeanors"; 8. He shall have the power to pardon
all offenses but cases of impeachment; and 9. He shall send to
congress information on the state of the nation.
The constitution also creates a vice-president, to serve when the
president is incapacitated for office and to preside over the senate.
He is chosen in the same way as the president. Originally
President tne electors were to vote for two men, and the one having
the highest vote was to be president and the next to be
vice-president. The growth of parties showed weakness in this
feature of the system, and the twelfth amendment, 1804, provided
that the presidential electors should vote separately for president and
vice-president, the majority vote electing to each office. If no candi-
date for president has a majority, the election goes to the house of
representatives, which, voting by states, shall choose from the three
highest candidates.
The president is given power to call on the heads of the executive
departments for written opinions relative to their respective depart-
Th ments. This clause is all the constitution contains
Cabinet. *n reference to the cabinet. Out of it have grown impor-
tant functions. It is held that a president may appoint
or remove the members of his cabinet ; but congress alone may create
a new department, whose head thus becomes a member of the cabinet.
In creating a strong executive and a congress with large powers
of legislation, the constitution added greatly to the nationalism of the
government. It went still further when it established a
Courts! ( system of federal courts. It provides that the judicial
power of the union shall reside in a supreme court and such
lower courts as congress may establish. The judges are appointed
as other federal officers and hold office during good behavior. Their
most important jurisdiction extends to cases arising under the con-
stitution, laws, and treaties of the United States, cases affecting
foreign ministers and consuls, admiralty cases, cases in which the
United States is a party, and controversies between two or more states,
or between a state and citizens of another state, or between citizens
LIMITATIONS ON THE STATES 253
of different states, or between a state or its citizens and a foreign
state. The supreme court has original jurisdiction only in cases
concerning foreign ministers and consuls and those in which a state
is a party. In other cases it has appellate jurisdiction. Treason
against the United States consists of "levying war against
them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid
and comfort"; and conviction of treason shall only
occur on the evidence given in open court of two witnesses to the
same overt act, or upon confession in open court.
The old congress had as much judicial jurisdiction as the articles
of confederation allowed to the central government. The makers
of the constitution considered this union of legislative . .
and judicial functions unwise, and they took pains to #£££"
make the executive, legislative, and judicial organs inde-
pendent of one another, holding that each would check the evil
tendencies of the other. As a result, great power was given to the
federal courts. They have become interpreters of the constitution
and in that capacity have declared null laws of congress, laws of the
states, and even state constitutions, when there has seemed to them
to be a conflict with the powers of the general government. Creat-
ing the federal courts was one of the most powerful expressions of
nationality adopted by the convention of 1787.
The constitution provides two methods of amendment : i . Two-
thirds of each house may approve an amendment, and it becomes
effective when accepted by three-fourths of the states;
2. The legislatures of two- thirds of the states may call
for a constitutional convention, which congress must
summon. The product of a constitutional convention becomes
law when ratified by three-fourths of the states.
In several general ways the constitution modifies the power of
a state: i. It guarantees to each a republican form of government
and to the citizen of one state residing in another all the
rights of a citizen of that state ; 2. Fugitives from justice J^jjgtions
and from labor are ordered to be surrendered on the spates,
demand of the state from which they fled. 3. No state
may emit bills of credit, make anything but gold and silver coin a
legal tender, or pass a bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or a law impair-
ing the obligation of a contract; 4. No state may lay imposts or
duties on imports or exports without the consent of congress ; and
5. The constitution and laws in pursuance thereof are to be the su-
preme law of the land.
Besides these specific limitations we must consider the immense
national authority and prestige, which was bound to reduce the state's
pretension to complete sovereignty. But the state felt its inferi-
ority less because it had not exercised many of the powers now
relinquished, and because it retained most of the functions vital to
254 MAKING THE CONSTITUTION
its own interests. It was still a self-governing community, making
laws to govern personal and property relations, controlling its
own plans for social improvement, regulating the police
pverween- power over its own citizens, choosing its own govern-
ofgtheeStige ment» administering its own laws in its own courts, and
Nation. doing other things which were not themselves connected
with the life of the general government. In all things
properly within its own sphere it was conceded to be supreme.
In 1789 the bounds between its authority and that of the nation
were not well denned, and if there should be conflict between the
two in a matter of interpretation, it seemed probable
Probable ^at ^ stronger would win. Three features of the national
Conflict.0 constitution were ominous: i. Congress had power to
•*™ lay taxes to provide for the general welfare. If the phrase
"general welfare" were given a broad interpretation, it was difficult
to say what congress might not do. 2. The constitution and the
laws of congress were made supreme law, and the federal courts were
given power to declare null state constitutions and laws in conflict
with them. If, therefore, a controversy between a state and the
nation should come before such a court, it seemed probable that the
federal supreme court would support the authority of the latter.
3. Congress was given control over interstate commerce. This
was not of great apparent importance at the time, but the develop-
ment of means of communication would increase interstate commerce,
enlarge the activity of the federal government in supervision of it,
and produce frequent situations in which a state should be unable
to regulate commerce within its borders, on the ground that to do
so would interfere with interstate relations.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
General references are the same as for the preceding chapter. On the consti-
tution, see the following secondary works : Meigs, Growth of the Constitution in the
Federal Convention (1900) ; Taylor, Origin and Growth of the American Constitution
(1911), gives too much importance to Pelatiah Webster's pamphlet; Story,
Commentaries on the Constitution, 2 vols. (eds. 1873 and 1891); Curtis, Consti-
tutional History of the United States, 2 vols. (1889-1896) ; Jameson, Studies in the
History of the Federal Convention (Amer. Hist. Assn. Report, 1902) ; Beard, Read-
ings in American Government and Politics (1909) ; Bryce, The American Common-
wealth, 2 vols. (ed. 1911); Thayer, Cases on Constitutional Law, 2 vols. (1895);
Learned, The President's Cabinet (1912); and Hare, American Constitutional Law,
2 vols. (1889).
The original material on the convention has been many times published. The
best edition is Farrand, Records of the Federal Convention (1911), 3 vols. It contains
the journal of the convention and the notes on debate by Madison, Yates, Patterson,
McHenry, King, Peirce, and Hamilton, each presented day by day. Vol. Ill
contains in reprint many valuable speeches, letters, etc. The journal and most of
the notes are in Elliot, Debates, 5 vols. (ed. 1836) ; also the debates in state ratify-
ing conventions. Madison's Notes are in several editions, the best being by Hunt,
vols. Ill and IV, in the Writings of Madison. There are several editions of The
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
255
Federalist, but the best are by P. L. Ford, Lodge, and Dawson. On the author-
ship of The Federalist, see Bourne and Ford, P. L., in American Historical
Review, II, 443-460 and 675-687. Original pamphlets are reprinted in Ford, P. L.,
Essays on the Constitution (1892) and Pamphlets on the Constitution (1888).
Another comprehensive list of original documents is in The Documentary History
of the Constitution, 5 vols. (1895-1905).
Much valuable information is in the writings and biographies of public men of
the time. Of the former, see Ford, W. C., Washington, 14 vols. (1889-1893);
Sparks, Washington, 12 vols. (1834-1837); Hunt, Madison, 9 vols. (1900-1910);
Lodge, Hamilton, 9 vols. (1885-1886) ; Bigelow, Franklin, 10 vols. (1887-1888) ;
Adams, C. F., John Adams, 10 vols. (1850-1856); Hamilton, Monroe, 7 vols.
(1898-1903) ; and Ford, P. L., Jefferson, 10 vols. ; (1892-1899). The most important
biographies are: Hunt, Madison (1902); Rives, Madison, 3 vols. (1859-1868);
Jay, Wm., John Jay, 2 vols. (1833) ; Rowland, Mason, 2 vols. (1892) ; Henry,
W. W., Patrick Henry, 3 vols. (1891); Wells, Samuel Adams, 3 vols. (1865);
Stille", Dickinson (1891) ; Austin, Gerry, 2 vols. (1828-1829) ; Lee, R. H. Lee (1825) ;
and Randall, Jefferson, 3 vols. (1858).
For Independent Reading
Elliott, Biographical Story of the Constitution (1910) ; Landon, Constitutional
History and Government (1889) ; Fiske, Critical Period (1888) ; Morse, Life of Franklin
(1889) ; Lodge, Alexander ffofll#ta»,(x882) ; and Morse, John Adams (1885).
CHAPTER XII
WASHINGTON'S PRESIDENCY — A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
THE WORK OF ORGANIZATION
JULY 2, 1788, the president of the old congress, in session in New
York, rose and announced that nine states having ratified the con-
stitution, it was in order to take steps to establish the new
government. His hearers agreed with him, and it was
gress. resolved that the states should choose presidential elec-
tors on the first Wednesday in January, 1789, who, a
month later, should select a president and vice-president ; and that a
congress elected under the constitution should meet the first Wednes-
day in March following. After some debate, New York was selected
for the place of meeting. This was the last important legislation of the
congress which for fourteen years had guided the fortunes of all the
states through the dangers of war and the hardly less difficult trials
of peace. Would success crown the new system, over whose adoption
there had been so vast an amount of dispute ? Some wise
ones ^a(^ seri°us doubts, and the most hopeful admitted
that it was an "experiment, " but urged that it be given a
fair trial.
For president the unanimous choice was Washington. He was a
good general, though not a brilliant one. He was not a good speaker
and was not versed in the principles of government. But
Washington fa was honest, fair-minded, dignified, and faithful to the
President liberty of America. He had the power of commanding
obedience, and everybody, federalist and antifederalist,
trusted him. With Washington at the helm, faction would be
checked and the authority of the union respected. His personal
character was worth a great deal to the "experiment." It gave
it the confidence of Americans and foreigners. John Adams was
elected vice-president.
At the time designated very few members of congress were in New
York. The weak-hearted thought this was because nobody cared
for the new plan, but others showed that it was because
Meets*8* tke roads were bad. April 6, the senate had a quorum,
the electoral votes were counted, and a messenger went
to summon the president-elect to the seat of government. April
30, he was in the city and took the oath of office. On his journey to
New York he received every mark of affection from the people.
256
ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENTS 257
The problems before president and congress were numerous. All
that the old confederation could not do had now to be taken up. In
the first place, the government was to be organized. The officers
of state, great and small, must be appointed ; federal
courts, high and low, must be created ; a revenue law must
be devised ; the revolutionary debt must be placed on a
sound basis ; commerce must be regulated ; those parts of the treaty of
1783 which were not executed must be carried into effect ; our relations
with foreign states must be defined in proper treaties ; a site for the
federal capital must be selected ; and many other minor affairs must
have attention. They were tasks which demanded the wisdom of the
best men in the country, and they engaged the attention of Washing-
ton and congress through most of his two administrations. Men
approached them with the greater caution, because they felt that all
that was done would be taken for precedents in the conduct of the
affairs of the future.
The first thing was to raise a revenue. Madison, a member of the
house of representatives — generally called "the house" — intro-
duced the subject by moving an import duty of 5 per cent
on all articles brought into the country. A Pennsylvania R6yenue
delegate objected. He wished a small tax for revenue,
but asked that it be laid so as to protect articles produced in America.
The Middle states were then the chief center of American manufac-
tures. After much discussion, the protective principle was adopted,
but it was for a long time made incidental to the purpose of getting a
revenue.
Then congress took up the task of creating great administrative
departments. In July it created a department of state, in August, a
department of war, and in September, a department of
the treasury. Over each was to be a head of department, ™e ^dnln'
, . , , ,, , . - .. istrativeDe-
who should ever be nominated by the chief executive and partments.
confirmed by the senate. Over the first the president ap-
pointed Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia, who had just come back from
Paris, where he had been our minister since 1785. Over the second
he placed Alexander Hamilton, of New York, then, as later, known
for one of the best-informed Americans in questions of finance, a
man of fine mind, versed in principles of government, and a leading
politician. Over the third he placed Henry Knox, of Massachusetts,
a man of no great ability, but popular because he was a revolutionary
general and had influence in New England. Congress also created
the office of attorney-general, to which Edmund Randolph, of Vir-
ginia, was appointed. He was merely law adviser to the administra-
tion, had a small salary, and was expected to have outside practice
if he wished it. The first three heads of department were brought
together to advise the president about problems of administration,
and this was the beginning of the cabinet. It was not until 1870 that
258 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
the department of justice was formally organized with the attorney-
general at the head, but he attended cabinet meetings from the first.
Although the laws creating the departments said nothing about the
right of removing the heads, it was generally held that it lay with the
president, and on this theory later practice has proceeded. It would
be unwise to force the president to keep in his cabinet a man who is
uncongenial, or who does not have his confidence.
Next came the judiciary. No one objected to a supreme court, but
some thought that the state courts should be given jurisdiction over
federal cases in the lower stages, with appeal to the higher
Federal court. This did not please the majority of congress, who
tabiished?" wished that the government should have a complete court
system of its own. It was accordingly decided to create,
besides the supreme court, with one chief justice and five associate
justices, four circuit and thirteen district courts, whose judges should
be appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. The
number of these lower courts has been increased with the growth of the
union.
Another duty was to deal with the amendments sent up by the
ratifying states. Henry and other prominent antifederalists had
pronounced the plan of ratifying with suggestions of amend-
ments"" " ments a subterfuge ; and for a time it seemed that they
were right. Weeks passed and congress took no notice
of amendments. Then the complaints at home became so loud that
congress dared ' not delay longer. The suggested amendments were
referred to a committee. All that looked toward a modification of the
plan of union were ignored, and the twelve which congress sent to
the states for adoption were in the nature of a bill of rights. Ten
of these were accepted. The antifederalists declared that this con-
firmed their previous suspicions, and criticized congress roundly.
But the subject did not interest the people, and the antifederalist
party soon disintegrated ; for other measures were coming up to divide
the voters into two great parties.
The constitution designed that congress should be entirely inde-
pendent of the executive. The president could communicate infor-
mation, but neither he nor his cabinet could speak on the
Theinitia- floor or vote in its proceedings. Each house was very
Confess Jealous of interference from that quarter, and he, there-
fore, has no initiative in legislation. This important
function was referred to committees. To them were sent impor-
tant bills introduced by members. The most powerful stand-
ing committee in the house was the committee of ways
sionai^om- and means, created in 1795, whose functions were con-
mittees. nected with raising and expending revenue. At first the
committees were special, but in time standing committees
came into general use. In the first congress the committees of each
HAMILTON AND THE FINANCES 259
house were elected by the members, but from 1790 to 1911 the
speaker of the house, who has been a party man since 1791, ap-
pointed the committees in that branch. The senate committees are
still elected by the members of the senate.
FINANCIAL REORGANIZATION
The first session of congress lasted until September 29, 1789.
One of its last acts was to ask Hamilton, secretary of the treasury,
to prepare a report on the state of the finances. He
took up the task with accustomed energy, and the f*^™&*_
result was four reports covering every phase of the ciaj Rep0rts.
matter intrusted to him. The first was submitted
January 14, 1790, and dealt with the public debt; the second,
submitted December 13, 1790, recommended an excise; the third,
December 13, 1790, recommended a national bank ; and the fourth,
December 5, 1791, argued for the protection of manufactures. The
fourth report was not considered when introduced, but the others
were enacted into law.
The debt was then, including arrears of interest, divided as follows:
due to foreigners, $11,710,378 ; to domestic creditors, $42,414,085 ; and
a floating debt of $2,000,000. Hamilton proposed to re-
fund all this at par. Now, the domestic debt had been
selling as low as 25 per cent of par, and the first suggestion
of paying at par had led the speculators to buy the old
certificates wherever found. Should the government enable them to
make the handsome profits anticipated now became an urgent ques-
/ tion in congress. Hamilton claimed that such a course was necessary
to place the public credit on a sound basis ; others, mostly men from
rural constituencies, urged that the idea was preposterous. They
thought he wished to found a party whose center was men of wealth,
through whose influence persons dependent on them for financial pros-
perity should be dominated. It was the first appearance in the new
government of party division. Madison supported the latter view
and proposed that the debt be paid at par, but that the speculators
be given only the ruling price and that the rest up to par be paid to the
original holders of the debt. This plan found favor with some mem-
bers, but the majority thought it impossible to determine who were
the original holders, and it was decided to pay the debt as proposed by
Hamilton.
The secretary of the treasury wished also to assume the debt in-
curred by the states in aid of the revolution. This propo-
sition aroused still greater opposition. Some states had ^state*011
paid much of their revolutionary debt and objected to Debts.
assuming a part of that of others, as they must do as a
part of the union, if the measure carried. But those states which had
26o A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
not settled their debts were in favor of the plan . As leader of the former,
now appeared Madison. In 1787 he had been prominent in the party
of nationality, but he now argued that the constitution gave congress
no power to assume state debts. After weeks of discussion the op-
ponents of assumption had a small majority. But before the vote was
finally cast, a compromise was effected, chiefly through the efforts of
Hamilton and Jefferson. The Southerners favored locat-
in& the caPital on tne Potomac, but lacked a few votes for
that purpose. It was agreed that enough Southern votes
should be got for assumption to carry it, if enough Northern votes
were secured to get a Southern location of the capital ; and on this
basis both measures were carried in the spring of 1790. Hamilton
and the nationalists were pleased, because they thought assumption
would strengthen the national government and invigorate the national
credit by removing from the sphere of doubt a large mass of securities
which the states, in the existing distress, could not hope to pay for
many years. As it turned out, assumption increased the obligations
of the United States by $18,271,786.
Refunding, as time showed, was a slow process. In 1795 over a
million dollars of the old debt was still unfunded. Including this
amount, the total was $77,500,000, of which the foreign debt,
Debt $11,710,000, paid interest at 4 per cent, 4^ per cent, and 5
per cent. Of the domestic debt of $65,800,000, about half,
45.4 per cent, paid interest at 6 per cent, while 30.3 per cent paid at
3 per cent, and 24.3 per cent was at 6 per cent with interest pay-
ments deferred until 1801.
To pay the debt, Hamilton got congress to establish a sinking fund
which, it was supposed, would eventually absorb the entire indebted-
ness. He did not fear a national debt, but said it might even become
a national blessing. His adversaries charged that he wished to make
it perpetual, like the debt of Great Britain. The majority of the
people, like thrifty husbandmen, wished to pay it gradually. But
a national debt, by causing the capitalists who held it to look to the
government for payment, was a strong bond of union.
Hamilton considered a great national bank, like that of England, a
necessity. It would issue large quantities of its notes and thus provide
a much-needed and safe currency; it would enable the
First Bank government to sell its bonds quickly at home and abroad ;
United ^ would furnish a safe and cheap means of exchange for
States. the people ; by establishing branches in the leading cities,
it would enable the government to transfer its funds
cheaply; and it would furnish a safe place for keeping the public
funds. His opponents objected that it would give the bank a monop-
oly in exchange ; that by making its notes receivable for government
dues, it would have superior privileges ; that it would interfere with
the operations of state banks ; and that the constitution gave congress
HAMILTON'S SUCCESS 261
no power to establish a bank. They stressed the last objection most ;
and when a bill to create such a bank with a charter for twenty years
passed congress, efforts were made to have it vetoed. Washington
hesitated, but finally called on his cabinet for advice. Hamilton
argued for approval, and Knox supported him. Jefferson took the
other side and had the support of Randolph. The president at last
decided for Hamilton, on the ground that he would favor the man in
whose department, the treasury, the matter lay. The bank began
business in 1791 and had a capital stock of $10,000,000, of which the
government owned $2,000,000 for which it was to pay in installments.
The fact that the government was a large stockholder added to the
public confidence in the bank.
The third feature of Hamilton's scheme was an excise, a tax collected
on distilled liquors. Congress passed the bill to that effect, and Wash-
ington approved it. Hamilton supported it both because
it would give a revenue and because, by collecting the tax ^^ a (I
at the stills, owned chiefly by farmers, the power of the
general government would be brought home to the people of every part
of the country. Thus, each feature of Hamilton's scheme stood for *•
strong national authority. /In opposition to him grew up a party
opposed to centralization. The federalists, who supported Hamilton,
embraced the large business interests, capitalists, merchants, and
manufacturers, together with men who favored a strong ,
government generally^ The opposition, led by Jefferson, HationaJism
opposed further concentration and had strong support
from the farmers in the South and in the rural parts of the Middle
states. Among them were many former antifederalists ; but the
name was unpopular, because they no longer opposed the constitution.
They preferred the name ''republican," which gradually came into use.
Hamilton's financial plans proved very successful. /No one could
doubt that a country with such immense resources as the United
states could pay its obligations, if it wished; and the
enactment of the laws he recommended expressed its
purpose in the matter./ Accordingly, the bonds sold well,
the bank he established proved successful, and confidence
in the future was high. Bold imagination characterized every scheme
he espoused, and in each case he was justified by the result.^ With
the enactment of his suggestions vanished ah1 fears that the nation
would be embarrassed by its debts. /
ADJUSTING FOREIGN RELATIONS
Meanwhile, our foreign relations demanded attention. England
had not paid for the slaves carried away at the end of the revolution,
and she still held five frontier posts extending from Lake Champlain
to the north of Lake Superior, all of which was contrary to the treaty.
•
262 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
She justified her failure on the ground that we still impeded the col-
lection of British debts and had not relaxed our regulations against
the loyalists. These Western posts were centers of a
The Treaty rich Canadian fur trade, to which our own traders wished
ecuted~ to Set access, and we justly attributed her action to her
desire to prolong as much as possible her advantage in that
respect. Another complaint was that she would not make a com-
mercial treaty. American traders wished to have her modify her
navigation laws so as to allow them to share in the trade with the
West Indies. Washington took early notice of the situation, and in
1789 sent Gouverneur Morris to London to see if arrangements could
be made. The British ministry was immovable, and Morris, like
Adams several years earlier, could think of nothing better than to ad-
vise that we draw near to France in commercial affairs, — a threat as
impotent now as formerly; for France did not manufacture the mer-
chandise we needed. It was not until the autumn of 1791 that the
first British minister to the new government arrived in Philadelphia,
the seat of government from 1790 to 1800, but he brought no instruc-
tions to make a treaty, and the futile negotiations still went on.
By this time the Indians south of Lake Erie were in a state of fer-
ment. White settlers were appearing north and west of the Ohio, in
pursuance of a treaty at Fort Harmar in 1789, which the
Defeat^6 savages claimed was obtained through fraud. Their
fears were stimulated by the Canadian traders, who were
alarmed at the prospect of losing a region rich in furs. Gen-
eral St. Clair, governor and military commander in Ohio, asked
congress for troops to reduce the Indians to order. Two thousand
recruits were sent him, with which he marched from Cincinnati into
the forest north of it, where, November 4, 1791, he carelessly allowed
himself to be ambushed by the foe. Of the fourteen hundred men on
the field, only fifty escaped uninjured, and all the baggage was lost.
It was the first battle fought under the new government, and the news
of the disaster caused great distress in the East. Washington himself
gave St. Clair a severe rebuke and appointed Anthony Wayne, of
. revolutionary fame, to conduct another expedition against
Command. tne Incaans- October 7, 1793, Wayne marched with
2600 men for the enemy's country. He built Fort Green-
ville there, and went into winter quarters. In June, 1794, he was
joined by 1600 mounted men from Kentucky and began an advance.
The war had now taken on a new phase. From the beginning the
Indians received ammunition and guns from the British,
Comlica anc^ Canacuan traders and officials gave them open en-
tions! * couragement. Canada thought England would eventually
retain the Western posts, and wished to preserve the
Indian tribes intact, both on account of the fur trade and because they
would thus have a buffer between their own territory and that of the
OHIO OPENED TO SETTLEMENT 263
United States. In 1793 the hostiles showed a willingness to make
peace, but continued the war through the persuasion of the British.
In the following February, Dorchester, governor of Canada, made a
speech to a number of chiefs, telling them they were wronged by the
Americans, and that England and the United States would soon be at
war, when the Indians could recover their lands. At the same time
British soldiers from Detroit, one of the retained posts, were erecting
a fort sixty miles south of that place in territory unquestionably
American. All this was known in Philadelphia, and Washington
ordered Wayne to carry the intruding fort, if it was in his way. The
Indian war, therefore, seemed about to become a war against England.
This eventuality was averted by the rashness of the savages, who
chose to risk a battle south cf the offending fort. They met Wayne
in a body of fallen timber and were repulsed in a sharp
encounter. They fell back, but the fort refused to receive p^®of thc
them, and they dispersed into the forest. Wayne sent Timber.
out detachments to destroy their fields and villages, but
he did not attack the fort. After some time, he received overtures
from the hostiles and appointed a council to make a permanent peace
in the summer of 1795. The meeting was at Fort Greenville, where a
treaty, concluded on August 4, adopted a line from the
Ohio to Fort Recovery, thence eastward to the Muskingum,
and thence with that river and the Cuyahoga to Lake
Erie ; and the Indians recognized this line as their eastern
and southern boundary. Thus, most of Ohio was definitely open to
white ownership and soon became the scene of active settlement.
The war had the good effect of convincing England, and her more
confident colonists in Canada, that something must be done to settle
the dispute about the Western posts ; but it was in another negotiation
that the affair was adjusted.
At this time Spain held Louisiana and viewed with alarm the ad-
vance of the new republic into the transmontane region. In order to
check it she resorted to three intrigues, two with the ad-
venturous settlers themselves and one with the south-
western Indians. Holding the mouth of the Mississippi,
the outlet of the Western trade, she had a powerful argument for the
men of Kentucky and Tennessee. In 1785 Spain sent Gardoqui, an
able negotiator, to the United States to make a treaty. Three ques-
tions came up, the navigation of the Mississippi, recognition of the
secret clause of the treaty of peace of 1783, and commercial relations
with Spain's American possessions. The men of the seaboard were
concerned with the last, those of the West thought most of the first
and second. After much discussion, in which the Spaniard asserted
that he would never yield on the first and second point, Jay asked
permission to make a treaty in which we got concessions only in respect
to the third. The Eastern and Middle states se.emed complaisant,
264 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
but those of the South, who had lands on the Mississippi, objected
strenuously, and the proposed Jay-Gardoqui treaty of 1786 came to
naught.
But the Western settlers were deeply dissatisfied. They took Jay's
proposition to mean that the East cared nothing about them. Their
discontent was stimulated by agents whom the Spanish
to theWest g°vernor at New Orleans sent among them. It was his
hope that the Western communities could be induced to
revolt and place themselves under Spanish protection. One of his
paid agents was James Wilkinson, who distributed Spain's gold among
some Kentucky leaders and organized a party who supported the in-
trigue. The prospect of getting free navigation of the river served,
also, as a strong lure to the men of the West. In 1788 the intrigue
came to a head in Kentucky, the strongest Western community.
But the forces of order were greater than those of revolt, and the Ken-
tuckians rejected Wilkinson's appeals and contented themselves by
asking Virginia to consent to the creation of a new state out of her
transmontane lands. When the Old Dominion granted this in 1789
much of the discontent subsided, and a still better feeling was en-
gendered when Kentucky was made a state in 1792. In 1790 North
Carolina transferred her Western possessions to the union,
States but they were not admitted as the state °f Tennessee until
1796. In 1791 Vermont had been received as a state,
and all this was a pledge that the West should have fair treat-
ment as it grew in population. In this way Spain failed in her
scheming to stay the growth of the power of the United States
on her borders.
The controversy over the northern boundary of West Florida was
not so soon settled. The United States stood firmly for the secret
clause of the treaty, Spain stood against it. She had the
Bmmdar advantage of holding Natchez, within the disputed area,
and an attempt to oust her by force must lead to war, a
thing for which we were not ready. The president and cabinet
thought the matter should be deferred without prejudice to our claim ;
for it could be settled better when our population in that region was
strong enough to threaten occupation with decisive effect. But about
this time their plan seemed likely to fail by the intrusion of settle-
ments in the disputed region itself. In 1789 Georgia, who claimed
that the lands in the disputed region were within her
LandgGrants Dorders> made grants to three great companies, which
proposed to plant settlements. One of the companies
went so far as to open negotiations with the governor of New Orleans,
promising to recognize the authority of Spain if the settlements were
not opposed. Such a course must bring us into conflict with Spain,
and Washington promptly issued a proclamation warning the people
to have nothing to do with it. In consequence, the scheme failed, but
THE SOUTHERN INDIANS 265
the claims of the land companies remained as a source of irritation for
many years afterwards.
Spain's third intrigue was destined to come to a fate equally futile,
and for this Washington's diplomacy was also responsible. Between
Florida and the Tennessee settlements lived the powerful
Cherokee. Creek, Chickasaw, and Choctaw tribes, inhabit- *upain^-n
. i ., . the Indians.
ing a rich territory and strong enough to muster 10,000
warriors. They were friendly with the Spaniards, who bought their
furs and sold them merchandise, and whose trading posts were never
followed by farming communities. Alexander McGillivray, a rich
and capable half-breed Creek, a tory in the revolution who had suffered
at the hands of the whigs and who now hated the Americans, became
a Spanish agent to preserve Spain's influence with the Indians. A
treaty made in 1784 contained an Indian pledge that no white man
should visit the Creeks without a Spanish permit, and efforts were
made to get a similar treaty with the three other tribes. About this
time Indian attacks began to be made upon the growing settlements
in Tennessee, and it was evident that the officials of Florida encouraged
the attacks in order to impede settlement in that region.
Thus was created a situation demanding the intervention of the
general government. Washington resorted to diplomacy, although
the men of the frontier thought that war should have been
the instrument. McGillivray was induced to appear at
New York, where he received $100,000 for the damages
sustained during the revolution and was made a United
States agent in matters of trade with the rank of brigadier general.
In return he promised that the Creeks should be at peace with the
United States. The treaty was immediately broken, and his death in
1793 did not improve matters. The Tennesseeans grew restless under
their sufferings and wished to retaliate ; but the government was carry-
ing on a long-drawn-out negotiation with Spain and
ordered that the peace should be observed. For a while
the frontiersmen complied, but at last they were goaded to nesseeans.
action. In 1793 Sevier, with a band of East Tennesseeans,
and in 1794 Robertson, with a party of West Tennesseeans, made raids
on the bands of offending Cherokees, burning their villages and killing
without mercy. From that time the settlements had peace.
Happily, at this time the negotiations which had gone on haltingly
at Madrid since 1791 took a favorable turn. France was at war
with Spain, and Genet, just arrived at Charleston, was or-
ganizing forces to move, regardless of our neutrality,
against Florida and New Orleans. Three expeditions
were proposed, one against Florida and two against Louisiana.
Spite of Washington's efforts to interfere, preparations went forward
rapidly, and only Genet's recall averted, it seems> serious trouble of
this kind. The response of the men of Kentucky, Georgia, and the
266 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
Carolinas showed Spain how much unpopularity her policy was develop-
ing in our back country, and her tone became more conciliatory.
Washington seized the opportunity to quicken the currents of diplo-
macy, and the result was a treaty arranged by Thomas Pinckney,
our minister, with Godoy, a liberal Spaniard, on October 27, 1795.
It confirmed the secret clause of the treaty of 1783 relative to the
Florida boundary, gave the Americans the right to use the river, and
allowed them to deposit in New Orleans products intended for exporta-
tion. Kentucky and Tennessee thus got easy access to outside markets,
Georgia acquired a better title to the southern half of her Western lands,
and the national government closed an annoying dispute with Spain.
THE UNITED STATES AND THE EUROPEAN WAR
In 1793 France beheaded her king, and almost immediately was at
war with England and Spam. The year before she had begun a war
with Austria and Prussia. The South generally was en-
Americans, thusiastic in her behalf, as well as the farmers and ordinary
townsmen of the Middle states. But the trading class
everywhere, closely dependent on England, felt otherwise, and they
were supported by the rural New Englanders, who, under the influence
of the congregational clergy, hated a republic which had enthroned
a Goddess of Reason. Washington feared that the ardent French
partisans would, by some rash action, bring on war with England,
and issued a proclamation of neutrality. Inasmuch as the treaties
of 1778 (seepage 199) were still in force, the French party took this for
British partisanship. The proclamation was roundly denounced in
the newspapers of the newly founded republican party and defended
in those of the federalists. At this time our politics be-
Prochuna- came divided in accordance with the division in Europe,
rton. and from this situation they did not emerge until Napoleon
was definitely defeated and France ceased to be at war
against the powers around her.
April 8, 1793, Genet, first minister from the French republic, arrived
at Charleston. The merchants and great planters received him
coolly, but the populace were mad with joy. Carried
Arrival. away by his reception, he raised troops for operations
against Spain and commissioned privateers against Eng-
land. Departing for Philadelphia by land, he was received enthu-
siastically by the farmers of the Carolinas and Virginia and became
convinced that the American people were in sympathy with France.
Washington received him with reserve, and Genet grew angry and in-
formed his government that the American people did not approve the
neutrality proclamation. He described the president as a weak old
man, under British influence. Many of his deeds were as foolish as
his words. The republicans gave him encouragement at first, and he
GENET DISCREDITED 267
formed the intention of getting congress to force Washington to act in
behalf of France. Finally, he talked openly about his appeal to the
people. The federalists attacked him from the beginning, and they
made so much of his ill-advised attitude toward the administration
that even the republicans began to forsake him. No calm patriot
would tolerate an open attempt by a foreigner to influence the internal
policy of the country.
Washington was rarely moved by popular clamor, and he intended
to preserve neutrality. The treaties of 1778 provided that the French
might bring their prizes into our ports and that enemies of
France might not fit out privateers there. Genet inter-
preted this to mean that French prizes brought in might Treaties.
also be sold, and that France might fit out privateers in
American ports. His view was brought before the cabinet, where
Hamilton opposed it totally and Jefferson would allow as much of it
as would not bring us into war with England. Washington held the
balance. He would do all the treaties required ; and it was decided
that France might fit out privateers in our ports but send them away
at once and not use our ports as a base of operation, or send in and sell
prizes captured at sea. Genet complied unwillingly. He had already
licensed fourteen privateers which had taken eighty prizes.
A month later, July, 1793, it was known that he was fitting out a
prize, The Little Sarah, with cannon and was about to send her to sea.
When approached, he became angry and talked of appeal-
ing to the people ; but when he learned that the ship was
about to be seized, he agreed that she would not sail with-
out notice. Ten days later the promise was violated.
Washington was outraged. "Is the minister of the French republic,"
he said, " to set the acts of this government at defiance with impunity ?"
He convened the cabinet, which decided to ask France to recall Genet.
It also determined to exclude French prizes and privateers in the future.
The demand caused no dissatisfaction in Paris, where a fresh revolu-
tion of party had left the luckless Genet in danger of his life. In fact,
Fauchet, his successor, was instructed to arrest Genet and send him
home for trial. He owed his safety to Washington, who generously
refused to allow him to be extradited. He remained in America, mar-
ried a daughter of Governor Clinton of New York, and died in that state
at an old age.
THE WHISKY INSURRECTION
Hamilton's excise law, passed in January, 1791, was very unpopular
in the western counties of Pennsylvania and the states southward, a
region through which the Scotch-Irish were widely settled. .
They brought with them the habit of making whisky out opposed.86
of grain, and by 1791 their stills on every farm furnished
so much of the liquor that it superseded the New England rum, which
268 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
in colonial times was the common tipple throughout the colonies.
The tax was not large, but it was resented because it was inquisitorial.
The opposition reached actual violence only in Pennsylvania, where
four counties had been organized in the valley of the Monongahela, all
lying to the south of Pittsburgh. The people there were near enough
to the new settlements in the Ohio valley to feel much of that spirit of
independence which had caused some men to fear a separation of the
West from the East at no distant day.
In 1791 popular meetings began to be held to urge the inhabitants
to defy the excise law. The leaders were in a violent mood, and threat-
ened to deal with officers collecting the tax. Albert
Gallatin, later to have a distinguished career in national
politics, lived in the region, attended the meetings, and
sought to check the trend to violence. His efforts were
futile ; for the angry farmers listened more willingly to the harangues
of the men of action. They paid no attention to a proclamation of
warning which Washington, at Hamilton's suggestion, issued in 1792,
and continued to hold meetings, threaten the revenue officers, and
cut up the stills of those who obeyed the objectionable law. In 1794
fifty warrants were drawn for persons concerned in these outrages
and made returnable to the federal court in Philadelphia.
Trouble arose when they were served. A mob surrounded the
house of Neville, an inspector, to make him give up his commission,
and six men were wounded and one killed by shots fired
hi Arms from his nouse- The people flew to arms, and Neville
fled for his life. The leader of discontent was now Brad-
ford, a noisy demagogue, who summoned the counties to send delegates
to a general meeting at Parkinson's Ferry in the following August.
In the excitement of the time the mail was robbed and the discontented
ones assembled in great numbers near Pittsburgh, probably to overawe
the small garrison there. But the leaders lost courage and contented
themselves with marching through the town as a demonstration of
their power.
It was high time for the forces of order to assert themselves, but
Governor Mifflin, of Pennsylvania, feared to make himself unpopular
with the farmers, and refused tp call out the militia. Then
Washington decided to interfere. He sent out a proc-
lamation against the rioters and called for fifteen thou-
sand men from Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, to march by
the first of September. Meanwhile, he sent commissioners to visit
the back counties to see if the people could be persuaded to submit to
the law. They arrived, with two commissioners appointed
^y Mifflin, while the Parkinson Ferry meeting was in ses-
sion. The quick response of the militia was by this time
known in the West and caused the people to hesitate. Gallatin took
advantage of the lull to urge moderation, and it was decided to
DISORDER SUPPRESSED 269
appoint a committee to treat for peace. Bradford raised the cry that
the enemy was winning through the use of money. There was much
dissension in the back counties themselves, but the onward march of
the army gave powerful support to those who wished peace. It was
finally decided to send men across the mountains to ask Washington
for better terms.
Meanwhile, two divisions of troops were converging on the dis-
affected region, one by way of Carlisle and Bedford, the other byway of
Cumberland and the old Braddock road. They met at
Parkinson Ferry on November 8, but no force showed ^JJ^0*
itself against them. At the demand of the military rection.
power the people now submitted and took oaths of loyalty ;
and 2500 troops were left in the country for the winter. Hamilton,
who accompanied the army in a civil capacity, secured the arrest of
such leaders as did not flee westward, and eighteen of them were sent
to Philadelphia for trial. Of these only two were convicted, and they
were pardoned by Washington. No further opposition was made to
the excise, but it was still denounced by the republicans and was re-
pealed when Jefferson became president.
The force called out against the four counties in insurrection was
larger than the number of men of military age in their limits. It was
larger than most of the revolutionary armies, and larger
than any army under Washington before the French
alliance. It was only one thousand men smaller than the
allied American army which captured Cornwallis with 7000 men at
York town. A thousand men could have suppressed the insurrection.
In calling for 15,000 Washington followed the suggestion of Hamilton,
who wished to demonstrate the power of the government; and in
this respect the plan succeeded. But his opponents denounced it as
showing the tendency of the federalists toward militarism. Hamil-
ton's general policy of a strong government, which could intimidate
the unruly, suited England, which he thought the best-governed
country in the world. But it was a mistake in a country in which the
unruly all had the ballot, for it tended to make them the political
opponents of the party in power.
POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT UNDER WASHINGTON
Washington was elected president without regard to party. During
the revolution all whigs stood together and division in the ranks was
deplored. The first cabinet and the first congress were
composed of men who had favored the adoption of the
constitution; for it was not probable that men should
be selected to organize a government which they had not wished to
establish. Washington's first appointments in the civil service were
generally from the same class. When North Carolina and Rhode
270 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
Island gave in their tardy submission to the constitution, he removed
the antifederalist revenue officers within their borders and appointed
successors who were federalists. Nobody objected, for .the anti-
federalist group had no occasion to continue its existence and imme-
diately disappeared. Washington hoped that his supporters would
remain undivided and was distressed when he saw them forming
pa/ties.
/This process began with the introduction of Hamilton's financial
[/plan, which pleased the property-owning class and the advocates
of a strong central government. Hamilton thought wealth
fet Party6"1" an(* intelligence would rule, partly because they could
act promptly and with bold initiative, and partly because
they would ever have great influence over less competent classes.
Washington sympathized with this view and supported it when oc-
casion arose throughout his administration. Thus was organized
the Hamiltonian party, which took the name federalist because it
sought to promote nationality. It was strongest in the trading
cities, most of which were north of the Potomac, and among the large
planters of the South. It was conservative and mildly aristocratic.
Opposed to these views was Jefferson, who had ever rejected a privi-
leged class and who believed in democracy. He had great organizing
ability, but was not a good public speaker. He realized
UCA^P^' t^iat tne middle and lower classes were a vast majority of
Forming. * tne voters and might control the government if they could
be organized into an effective party. The superior classes
had their own organization ; he must make one. They had influence
over the mass of voters ; he must break down that influence. He
found many men who disliked Hamilton, never a considerate man to
those who differed with him, others who held, as Jefferson, to the
democratic theory, others who feared the concentration of national
power, and still others who wished to make careers for themselves as
leaders of a great party. Jefferson was able to select the best men of
these groups, unite them in a common cause, restrain their passions,
and furnish them with successful campaign issues. He founded
newspapers which, in seeking to destroy the prestige of the
federalists with the masses, accused them of many harsh purposes.
They even attacked Washington, pronouncing him a monarchist. By
these fierce onslaughts, and by taking advantage of every mistake of
their adversaries, they slowly increased their power, and in 1800 ob-
tained control of the government. They were known as republicans.
There was some discontent in interior New England, but
FeeHn^in11 tne Power °f tne seaports overwhelmed it, and here the
the States, republicans had little hope. Hamilton's enemies in New
York, headed by Clinton, came readily into the move-
ment. In Pennsylvania the country people were opposed to the rul-
ing class in Philadelphia and became republicans gladly. In Virginia
WASHINGTON REFLECTED 271
i
and North Carolina the great planters lived in the counties along the
coast and the small farmers, far more numerous, lived in the uplands
and generally followed Jefferson. In Georgia the same thing was true.
In South Carolina the planters in the east and the Charleston mer-
chants formed a powerful ruling class, but the men of the interior were
republicans. In the new states of Kentucky and Tennessee the
frontiersmen were fiercely democratic. Jefferson, therefore, had
strong hopes of carrying all the South except Maryland and South
Carolina, and had good chances in Pennsylvania and New York. In
1792 these states had a majority of the electoral votes.
Hamilton considered the situation alarming. Washington intended
to retire to his estate, and it was likely that the federalists would sup-
port John Adams for his successor. Adams was honest
and capable, but unpopular out of New England. In
this dilemma Hamilton decided that Washington must
stand for reelection. He was met at first with a refusal, but he got
others to persuade Washington. Only orie man, it was felt, could
harmonize the contending parties. So strong was this feeling that
even Jefferson joined his voice to the general demand, and in the end
Washington consented to run. The republicans did not oppose him,
but supported George Clinton for the vice-presidency against Adams.
Washington received the votes of all the states, and Clinton those of
New York, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia, with one from
Pennsylvania, a total of 50 to Adams's 77.
The hope that Washington would reconcile parties proved futile.
In 1793 the European war began, the republicans espoused the cause
of republican France, and denounced the neutrality proc-
lamation. For a time this seemed to be an advantage,
but the excesses of Genet reacted against them, and the
federalists, most of whom leaned toward England, gained by declaring
that their opponents would sacrifice the honor of the country for the
sake of the infidel French republic. Indeed, from that time until
1800 the French ministers were in cordial relations with republican
leaders and did as much as they dared to secure the defeat of the
federalists. Jefferson, now definitely head of the opposition, recog-
nized that he was out of place in the cabinet and withdrew at the close
of the year 1793 to give all his efforts to the republican cause. His
place was taken by Edmund Randolph, a mild republican, but so
strong was the tendency to party government that he retired within
a year and was succeeded by Timothy Pickering, an avowed federalist.
The republicans early in 1794 took a bolder attitude.
Ceasing to plead for France, they began to demand war J^™ngs
against England ; and they had cause enough. When the England.
European conflict began, France opened to the world the
trade with her West Indian possessions. Too weak at sea to succor
them herself, she expected that they would sell their produce, chiefly
272 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
sugar, to the United States and receive American merchandise in ex-
change. England declared this unlawful, asserting that a trade denied
in time of peace could not be opened in time of war. Her men-of-war
began to seize American ships bound for the French islands and to
treat the captured crews with unusual rigor. The stories of hardship
that came back to our shores aroused the deepest horror, and the re-
publicans took advantage of the opportunity to demand retaliation.
The first move was made by Madison, in the house of representatives.
If England, he urged, made restrictions on our trade, we
T*radeS°n S oug^t to make restrict;ions of her trade with us. The fed-
Resolutions, eralists replied that since seven-eighths of our trade was
with England and could not be shifted to another nation,
we should injure ourselves more than England by passing the proposed
restrictions. It was the same argument which England used against
Adams's suggestion of retaliation in 1785. The argument was so good
that Madison's resolutions were postponed.
About this time came news that England had ordered the seizure
of all neutral ships carrying French goods. In America the excite-
ment was great ; for we held that neutral ships made neu-
Sh^and tra^ S°°ds. The republicans talked earnestly of war, and
Goods*1" congress authorized the erection of fortifications, the enlist-
ment of artillerymen, and the levying of a force of 80,000
militia, to be ready for an emergency. The extreme republicans, led
by Dayton, of New Jersey, introduced a resolution in the house to
sequester British debts as an offset to the loss from the seizure of
American ships. If this were passed, the result would probably be
war.
Washington was alarmed and decided to try to settle the dispute
by making a treaty with England. Conservative republicans as well
as federalists thought the attempt ought to be made ; and
*n May, 1794, he sent Jay to London with powers to make
a treaty which would secure the surrender of the Western
posts still in the hands of England, get compensation for the ships
recently, seized, and effect a commercial treaty which would remove
the irritation from further seizures of ships having French goods on
board and which would open British West Indian ports to our trade.
If these points could be arranged, thought Washington, war would
be avoided. When Jay was dispatched, the war feeling cooled and the
nation awaited the result.
Jay was a federalist and of an easy temperament. He found the
British government determined to maintain their existing navigation
Jay's Treaty *aws> an(^ *n n^s desire to make some kind of arrangement
accepted terms not allowed in his instructions. The treaty
he sent back early in 1795 provided for surrender of the posts by 1796,
and admitted us to the trade with the British East Indies, but only
put off a settlement for the ships seized by Britain. It contained
THE JAY TREATY 273
commercial regulations which admitted our ships not larger than 70
tons' burden to British West Indian ports and denied us the right
to carry West Indian products, including cotton, to Europe, while
British ships were to be unrestricted in our own trade. It also pro-
vided that privateers should not be fitted out in our ports by England's
enemies, that Americans serving against England should be treated
as pirates if captured, and that British trade in America should be on
the footing of the most favored nation. These latter provisions were
aimed at the French treaties of 1778. The West Indian clause of
Jay's treaty were to end two years after the termination of the
existing war.
A storm of indignation greeted its publication in America, the
republicans leading the chorus. Even the federalists could support
it only faintly, and Washington was much in doubt. But
reflection brought soberness. If the treaty were rejected, Treat7 •?-
the nation would almost surely drift into war, for which it ^end™
was not prepared. This view had weight with the senate, ments.
which cut out the features relating to the West India trade
and passed the treaty by the necessary two-thirds majority. Washing-
ton hesitated to sign it, but finally yielded. He thought that if we
could endure for twenty years the inferiority it forced us to accept, we
should be strong enough to defy an unjust measure of any power in
the world.
An interesting question now arose. The treaty provided for some
modifications of the laws and for the appropriation of money to exe-
cute it. But this required the consent of congress, and
thus the whole matter was debated in both houses in the J;*e£,utlonof
, TT . . . . tne ireaty.
year 1796. Here conservatism again won, and it was
ordered that the treaty be executed. The action in this case be-
came a precedent in making later treaties. The long struggle over
the question, culminating in the vehement debate in congress in
1796, served to harden the lines of the two parties, and their strength
is seen in the votes ; in the senate the resolution to execute the treaty
passed without serious opposition, but in the house the vote was 51
to 48, and a resolution declaring it highly objectionable was only
defeated by the deciding vote of the speaker.
When this vote was taken, the country was already thinking of a
new presidential election. Washington let it be known that he would
not be a candidate, and the federalists turned to Adams.
He was their strongest available man ; but he was tactless, ^^°n °f
though honest and experienced in public affairs. He was
so independent that he would not follow the lead of Hamilton, who
had formed a dislike for him, and who now sought to defeat him by an
unworthy scheme. He had Thomas Pinckney, of South Carolina,
brought forward for vice-president. Both men, he thought, would
have equal votes in the choice of electors, but at the last moment he
274 A PERIOD OF ORGANIZATION
would have some of the electors go for a third candidate instead of
voting for Adams, who thus having the second highest vote would
be vice-president, while Pinckney, whom Hamilton could probably
influence, would be president. The republicans united on Jefferson,
their best man. In the final vote some of the electors who were
friendly co Adams refused to support Pinckney, lest Hamilton's scheme
should succeed ; and the result was that 7 1 men voted for Adams,
68 for Jefferson, 59 for Pinckney, and 78 were divided among ten other
candidates. Each elector, it will bo remerruered, voted for two men.
Adams thus became president and Jefferson vice-president. As
Adams had only one more vote than a majority of the electors, he was
dubbed by his opponents "a president b*7" one vote," an epithet which
greatly annoyed his sensitive soul.
Washington, thinking chiefly of his retirement, took little interest
in the election. His last care was to prepare his celebrated "Farewell
Address," in which he gave much good advice on the prob-
*ems °^ tne ^a^' ^s t^iese problems were necessarily
tirement" related to the policies over which the parties were divided
and as his federalist leaning appeared in his advice, the
" Address " was received with coolness by the republicans. He had be-
come very unpopular with that party, and some of its leading men and
newspapers rejoiced openly that he was going out of office. As the
passions of the moment subsided, he recovered the popularity to which
his character entitled him, and the next generation came to look on
the " Farewell Address " as a priceless political heritage. Among other
things, it counseled his fellow citizens to be loyal to the union, to
cultivate harmony at home, and to shun entanglement with Euro-
pean policies. His administration was most important, because his
great name had been able to hold in abeyance through the first
eight years of the national government the inevitable wrangling of
parties, thereby giving an opportunity to launch the
Service8 government on a safe and enlightened plan. That critical
early period safely past, it was not dangerous for party
leaders to battle for their views, a necessary feature of all republican
government.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
On Washington's two administrations the most available general secondary
works are : Avery, The United States and its People, 7 vols. (1904-) ; Bassett,
The Federalist System (1906); McMaster, History, 7 vols. (1883-); Schouler,
History of the United States, 6 vols. (1880-1894) ; Hildreth, History, 6 vols. (1849-
1852), federalist in sympathy; Hamilton, J. C., History of the Republic of the United
States, 7 vols. (4th ed., 1879), a biased defense of Hamilton, but it contains valu-
able letters; Gordy, History of Political Parties, 2 vols. (revised ed. 1904), an
excellent book on early political parties; Johnston, Alexander, articles on political
conditions and institutions in Lalor's Cyclopaedia of Political Science, republished in
Woodburn, American Political History, 2 vols. (1905) ; Gibbs, The Administrations
of Washington and Adams, 2 vols. (1846), very partisan, but it contains valuable
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 275
letters; and Stan wood, History of the Presidency (1900), an excellent summary ol
national party divisions.
For original sources see : Peters, ed., Public Statutes at Large of the United
States, 8 vols. (1845) —treaties, Indian and foreign, are in vols. VII and VIII;
Annals of Congress, 42 vols. (1834-1856), the early debates, but they are not
reported verbatim; Benton, Abridgment of the Debates in Congress, 1780-1850,
24 vols. (1857-1863); Maclay, Journal, 1789-1791 (1900), valuable because the
early senate debates are not given in the Annals; Legislative Journal of the Senate,
5 vols. (1.820-1821) ; Executive Journal of the Senate, 3 vols. (1829) ; Journal of
the House of Representatives, 9 vols. (1826) ; papers relating to the departments —
diplomatic, financial, military, and relating to Indians and lands — in American
State Papers, 38 vols. (1832-1861); and Richardson, Messages and Papers of the
Presidents, 10 vols. (1897).
For the writings and biographies of Washington, Madison, Hamilton, Jefferson,
John Adams, Jay, Patrick Henry, and Gerry see references on page 255. See also :
Hamilton, Writings of Monroe, 7 vols. (1898-1903) ; King, Life and Correspondence
of Rufus King, 6 vols. (1894-1900) ; Ames, ed., Works of Fisher Ames , 2 vols. (1857) ;
Anne C. Morris, Diary and Letters of Gouverneur Morris, 2 vols. (1888) ; Adams,
Writings of Albert Gallatin, 3 vols. (1879) > and Wilkinson, Memoirs of my Own
Times, 3 vols. (1816), the last mentioned very untrustworthy. See the following
biographies also: Brown, Life of Oliver Ellsworth (1905); Adams, Life of Albert
Gallatin (1879); Pickering and Upham, Life of Timothy Pickering, 4 vols. (1867-
1875) ; Amory, Life of James Sullivan, 2 vols. (1859) ; and Conway, Life of Thomas
Paine, 2 vols. (1892).
On the whisky insurrection see : Adams, Life of Gallatin (1879) > Findley,
History of the Insurrection (1796), a good contemporary account ; H. M. Bracken-
ridge, History of the Western Insurrection (1859), written from the standpoint of
the participants; and Ward, The Insurrection of 1794 (Pennsylvania Hist. Soc.
Memoirs, VI).
On diplomatic affairs see : Trescott, Diplomatic History of the Administrations
of Washington and Adams (1857), good but rare; Snow, Treaties and Topics in
American Diplomacy (1894), for students ; Lyman, Diplomacy of the United
States, 1789-1826, 2 vols. (20! ed. 1828) ; McLaughlin, Western Posts and British
Debts (Am. Hist. Assoc. Report, 1894) ; Turner, Correspondence of the French Min-
isters to the United States, 1791-1797 (Ibid., 1903, II), contains Genet's correspon-
dence ; and Shepherd, Wilkinson and the Beginnings of the Spanish Conspiracy (Am.
Hist. Review, IX, 490).
For Independent Reading
Campbell, Travels in the Interior Inhabited Parts of North America, 1791-1792
(1793); Griswold, The Republican Court (1864); Hamilton, Life of Alexander
Hamilton (1910) ; and Woodrow Wilson, George Washington (1897).
CHAPTER XIII
ADAMS AND THE DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
THE POLITICAL CHARACTER or THE ADMINISTRATION
JOHN ADAMS began his presidency with a divided party. On one
side were his own friends, neither numerous nor well organized; on
the other were Hamilton and his supporters, probably two-
thirds of. the federalists and not inclined to submit to the
leadership of the other third. Adams retained Washing-
ton's cabinet, which supported Hamilton in all party matters, so that
the president came at last to realize that he was not head of his own
administration. The internal conflict which thus arose weakened the
federalist organization and contributed to its overthrow. Adams
regretted the situation ; for he was peculiarly desirous of having a
harmonious administration. When at last he found his cabinet in
practical rebellion, he reorganized it, casting out the extremists and
calling in moderate federalists, the chief of whom was Marshall of
Virginia. But this occurred too late to avert party defeat.
Adams's first action as president was an attempt to reunite the two
political parties. He had been widely accused of favoring a form of
monarchy ; but in his inaugural address he sought to over-
^idtcfth*0 come tn^s v^ew ^Y announcing his confidence in the con-
Parties, stitution. The republicans openly expressed their satis-
faction. He also proposed to appoint either Jefferson or
Madison minister to France, but the offer was declined by both gentle-
men. When the Hamilton faction heard of these negotiations, they
objected flatly, and there was no more talk of reconciliation. The
negotiations had, no doubt, been encouraged by the wily Jefferson, with
the object of widening the breach between the federalist factions.
Party rancor now became worse than ever. For Washington even
his enemies had a respect which moderated the jibes of the bitterest
foe. For Adams there was no such regard. He was piti-
lessly painted as a monarchist, a tyrant,* and a selfish
manipulator of patronage. Yet no president strove
harder to carry on the government in the spirit of its founders. It was
the youth of political discussion in America, and editors and pam-
phleteers on both sides fought relentlessly for their principles. In
France opponents of republicanism had recently gone to the guillo-
tine in shoals; in England defenders of republicanism had been im-
276
FRANCE AND AMERICAN POLITICS 277
prisoned or forced to flee the country ; it was, probably, as much as
could be expected that in our own newly established republic the only
violence that occurred was in the exchange of epithets.
It was, also, inevitable that in such a discussion should appear the
sharpest division between the British and French sympathizers.
Republicans, in defending France, expressed their loyalty
to popular government; federalists, in favoring the Brit- £°[^JIn
ish constitution, expressed their approval of government voived.
by the conservative upper classes of society, which implied
a distrust of the rule of all the people. To the former the triumph
of the Jay treaty seemed to show that British influence was alive in
the country; to the latter the ill-concealed attempts of the French
ministers in Philadelphia to direct American politics seemed convinc-
ing evidence that the court in Paris worked in behalf of the republican
party throughout the union.
Unfortunately, the latter contention was true, as events connected
with the dismissal of Monroe, late in Washington's second term, made
clear. This ardent republican was sent to Paris in 1794
to succeed Gouverneur Morris, whose monarchism made M°s"°* s
him unacceptable to the French republic. He arrived
in August, when no other state, except the small republic of Geneva,
had sent a minister to the new government. The Convention then
ruled France, and so busy was it with its own struggle for existence
that no arrangements had been made to receive foreign ministers.
Monroe, not to be thwarted by this fact, made arrangements to be
received by the Convention itself. He was accordingly admitted to an
open session of that body, where amid the Applause of the members
he exchanged embraces with the president of the Convention and pre-
sented a glowing address, pledging the cooperation in behalf of liberty
of the two great republics, the one in the Old, and the other in the New,
World. This display of fervor, occasioned protest in England, where
Jay was negotiating his treaty; and the federalist administration of
Washington sent a reproof to the enthusiastic Monroe.
Meanwhile, France was concerned at rumors of a treaty of amity
between the United States and England, but Monroe, relying on as-
surances from superiors, assured her that nothing would
be accepted in the proposed agreement prejudicial to the
interests of our oldest friend among nations. When the
treaty was made, however, it was evident that it did weaken that
preferential relation which the treaties of 1778 gave to France (see
page 201) ; and the government in Paris felt that it had been deceived.
Monroe himself was deeply chagrined, and neglected to defend the Jay
treaty in Paris, as he was instructed to do by Pickering, then secretary
of state. More than six months had passed in this way when he
learned that the ministry was about to send an envoy to America to
make a new treaty. Believing that such an attempt would result in
278 ADAMS AND DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
failure, and peaceful relations would therefore be imperiled, he in-
duced the ministry to delay their project. He was suspected of hold-
ing out to them the prospect of a republican victory in the coming
presidential elections, then only nine months distant. As the cam-
paign opened, he was known to be sending information to republicans
at home, which was used to convince the voters that the federalist
administration was about to plunge' the nation into war with France.
Washington considered this action a breach of trust, and
His Recall, ordered Monroe's immediate recall. The affair caused
much comment, the republicans defending and the federal-
ists condemning the dismissed minister.
Monroe returned anxious for vindication, and took two ways of
getting even. He prepared a long defense and published it in 1797,
endeavoring to show that he had been badly treated by
Pickering and Hamilton, the chief authors of federalist
XvcVcIlgc. _ . . . . i i* i • •
policy. It was a piece of specious pleading, but it satis-
fied the republicans and served to bring French affairs sharply to the
front in the political arena. His other stroke was at Hamilton particu-
larly. Some years earlier that gentleman was the subject of an in-
vestigation to meet the charge of misusing public money while secre-
tary of the treasury. The committee of inquiry, consisting of Monroe
and two others, pronounced him innocent, but did not publish the evi-
dence. In fact, Hamilton had proved his innocence only by admit-
ting that the charges grew out of an illicit relation with the wife of the
worthless man who preferred the charges, and this evidence the com-
mittee agreed to conceal. Soon after Monroe's return it was given
, to the public in such a distorted form that Hamilton felt
Ignominy S impelled to confess the whole matter in a published state-
ment. The two other committeemen showed that they
had not disclosed the affair, and posterity has concluded that the reve-
lation was made by Monroe. It left a smirch on Hamilton's reputa-
tion, which is not removed by the admiration we are compelled to
feel for his courageous explanation of it.
THE QUARREL WITH FRANCE
When Charles C. Pinckney, who succeeded Monroe at Paris, arrived
at his post of duty, he found the government in a resentful mood. He
Pinckne sent ^s credentials to the Directory, now the head of the
Rejected. government, only to be informed that France would not
receive an American minister until her grievances were
redressed. A law of the republic, passed when most strangers were
held to be spies, forbade foreigners to remain in France without
written permission. Pinckney asked for such permission, but received
no reply. He disregarded an intimation that a further stay made him
liable to arrest, because he wished the responsibility for his departure,
AN OUTBURST OF INDIGNATION 279
if he must go, to rest clearly with the government. After two months
of delay he received an official notice that he was liable to arrest,
whereupon he asked for his passports and shook the dust of France off
his feet in February, 1797. His rude reception was thrown into
bolder relief by the evidence of good will which the Directory
showered on Monroe, when he took his departure about the same
time.
When Pinckney's humiliating treatment was known in America,
there was a violent outbreak of feeling, and many expressions of
hostility were heard ; for the people are ever ready to re-
sent an insult to the national dignity. Among the poli-
ticians the extreme federalists wished to suspend relations
with France, and if reprisals occurred, which would lead to war, they
would be all the better pleased. They were led by Pickering and Wol-
cott, in the cabinet, and by Harper and William Smith, in congress.
The republicans could not defend the action of France, but declared
that it only indicated the mismanagement of the federalist party.
Between these two views was a middle ground taken by moderate
men, who defended the national honor, but were willing to try other
diplomatic efforts while preparations for war went on. Of this opinion
was President Adams, who in all the clamor of the day did not lose
his poise. Hamilton, not willing to sacrifice country to party, took
the same ground, although in doing so he failed to act with the faction
which generally supported him. The upshot was that Adams nomi-
nated Charles C. Pinckney, John Marshall, and Francis Dana com-
missioners to try to adjust the existing difficulty with France. The
republicans supported the nominations which were con-
firmed. But Dana refused to serve, and Adams, returning Commw-
, ., ., . ~y ,T 5 sionerssent
to a favorite idea, nominated Gerry, a Massachusetts to France.
republican, in his stead. He thought the presence of
a republican on the commission would tend to conciliate the Directory.
Steps were also taken to put the nation in a state of defense.
Three years earlier, congress had ordered the construction of six frig-
ates, three of which were actually begun, but were still
unfinished through lack of funds. They were now ordered |jj£]J"*~
completed. They were the United States and the Constitu- War
tion, of 44 guns each, and the Constellation, of 36 guns, the
first ships of our navy under the constitution. They were heavily
armed for their size, and foreign naval officers predicted they could
not be managed safely in battle, — an expectation which later events
did not justify. Other measures of defense were a law authorizing
the president to call out 80,000 militia when needed and a law to
strengthen the fortifications.
By this time serious grounds for trouble had arisen in connection with
our trade at sea. When, four years earlier, England began to seize
our ships carrying French goods, France retaliated by ordering her
28o ADAMS AND DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
naval officers to seize neutral ships which recognized England's pre-
tensions. If we allowed England's claim that provisions were contra-
band, contraband they were ; and on that ground France would seize
them when they were bound for British ports. Between
French Re- the pretensions of the two great powers it was impossi-
American011 ^e ^or a nati°n which had no navy to maintain a posi-
Trade. tion of strict neutrality. It was equally difficult for it
to retaliate, unless it was willing to join one of the nations in
war against the other. For such action we were not ready, and the
best we could do was to endure our wrongs and hope to get reparation
for losses after peace returned in Europe. Neither America nor
Europe could foresee that the war then waged was to continue without
considerable interruption until 1815. As time passed, many cases of
seizure occurred, and there was now danger that American shipowners,
already aroused against France, would by some act of reprisal provoke
such severe individual conflicts that it would be impossible longer to
restrain the war feeling on the part of our people. Adams, therefore,
issued an order forbidding merchant ships to go armed, and congress
passed a law prohibiting privateering against a nation with which we
were at peace. By such means it was hoped to preserve peace until
the commissioners to France could make a settlement of the existing
quarrel.
Arrived in Paris, Pinckney, Marshall, and Gerry began to negotiate
in October, 1797. To their surprise they made not a step of progress.
X Y and z Talleyrand was head of foreign affairs, and the Directory
was corrupt to the core. They had taken an overbearing
attitude toward small European states, each of which had some self-
ish end to advance, and were collecting bribes from them before they
would allow any arrangements to be made. What they did so freely
with such states, they were now determined to do with the United
States. While our commissioners waited for their business to be taken
up, they were visited by agents, designated in the published reports
of the commissioners as X, Y, and Z, who suggested that progress
would be made if the minister were given $250,000. To this sugges-.
tion, several times repeated, the commissioners opposed a steadfast
negative. Then they refused to see the agents, but prepared a state-
ment of the American case and sent it to Talleyrand. His reply, de-
layed two months, was insulting. He accused the United States of
prolonging the misunderstanding for their own benefit, asked why
three republican commissioners were not sent, and closed by saying
that he would treat with Gerry alone. To this coarse message a dig-
Ge nified reply was made, and the commissioners prepared to
Conduct. withdraw. Ere they went, Gerry was invited by Talley-
rand to remain and continue communication with the min-
istry. He hesitated a moment and then accepted, declaring that he
did so only as a private citizen and in the hope that he might be
THE NAVY'S METTLE 281
able to prevent war. His action was ill advised. It produced resent-
ment at home, and Adams summoned him to return instantly.
April 3, 1798, the "X, Y, Z papers," as the correspondence of the
commissioners was called, was sent to congress by the president, who
declared: "I will never send another minister to France
without assurances that he will be received, respected,
and honored as the representative of a free, powerful, and tion
independent nation." The moderate federalists now
joined the extremists, and many acts were passed looking to war.
By one of them a navy department was created, by another three new
frigates and thirty smaller vessels were ordered, by another the navy
was authorized to take French ships interfering with our commerce,
and by still another the treaties of 1778 were repealed. Another law
authorized an army of 10,000 men to serve for three years. All this
fell short of a declaration of war, and to that extent the extreme fed-
eralists were disappointed. From this time Hamilton was for war.
The few ships in the navy were quickly in West Indian waters,
fourteen men-of-war and eight converted merchantmen. There the
Constellation fell in with LJ Insurgent, whose commander gea p. htg
had seized many of our merchant vessels and was much
hated in America. An hour's chase followed, the Frenchman trying
to avoid conflict, as he was instructed to do by his superiors. At last
he was overhauled, and a spirited action of an hour and a quarter forced
him to surrender. As the angry French captain came aboard the Con-
stellation, he exclaimed: " Why have you fired on the national flag?
Our two nations are at peace." The reply of the American captain,
Truxtun, was laconic: "You are my prisoner." The victory
aroused great enthusiasm in America. A short time later Truxtun
met and fought a drawn battle with the French ship La Vengeance,
and many other smaller engagements followed. In two years and a
half our ships had taken 84 French ships, mostly privateers. The
result was a lessening of the number of seizures and added prestige
for the navy. This period of retaliation has been called a war with
France, but no state of war was recognized by the two governments.
Meanwhile, the organization of the new army was begun. Wash-
ington was appointed its commander and accepted, on condition that
he should name the chief subordinates. He sent three
names to Adams, — Hamilton, Charles C. Pinckney, and *
Knox. Confirmed in this order, the first would rank next
to Washington. Adams remembered old scores and ordered that they
should rank according to their station in the old army, — Knox, Pinck-
ney, and Hamilton. Now the last named was a good military man,
and Washington wanted him first among the three. Since the head of
the army was too old to take the field, it meant that Hamilton would
conduct the field movements. A strong controversy arose between
the friends of Knox and Hamilton. Adams decided at first for Knox,
282 ADAMS AND DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
but when Washington made a vigorous protest, the president dared not
ignore it, and Hamilton received the coveted station. He had retired
from civil life, but he loved the soldier's career, and as the federalists
meant to make the augmented army a permanent thing, the appoint-
ment was very attractive to him. He had much influence with
Washington, and used it freely to get that final intervention which
forced Adams to change the order of nominations. Adams did not
relish the way he was treated; he felt that he was hardly commander-
in-chief of the army, as the constitution provided; but he was not
willing to withstand the will of Washington.
Hamilton's success did him no good. Recruiting went on so slowly
that 1799 was well advanced before a fair beginning was made. By
this time enthusiasm was waning, and the newly-formed
Slow"1 ng camps became scenes of discontent and disorder. The
republicans denounced the whole affair as ill advised.
They divined their enemy's purpose to have a permanent establish-
ment, and pointed out the tendency to militarism. This new army
became an important argument in the campaign of 1800.
In fact, a little reflection showed that war was unnecessary. France
did not wish it, or she would have resented our attacks on her men-
of-war. To have asked our commissioners for a bribe was
necessary discreditable to her, but we need not fight on account of it.
Many people saw this, Adams among them, and he decided
to secure a restoration of harmony, if it could be done with dignity.
The proper occasion offered when in October, 1798, Murray, our
minister at The Hague, wrote that he was assured from Talleyrand
that a minister would now be received. Adams wished to send one,
but his cabinet, led by the factious Pickering, opposed. As the winter
passed, he realized that the extremists were bent on bringing on war
for their own ends, and determined to take affairs into his own hands.
Without warning, he nominated Murray minister to France,
Treaty an<^ tne senate received the news in disgust. Hamilton,
disappointed, declared nothing better could be expected
from Adams, and the other extremists raged inwardly. But they could
not resist, and accepted the suggestion after substituting three com-
missioners for the one minister proposed. The result was an accept-
able treaty, made in 1800, which settled for a time the chief points of
controversy between the two nations. Napoleon was now in control
in France. Occupied with vast plans in Europe, he wisely gave up
the policy pursued by the directory of nursing American politics in
the hope that a republican triumph on this side of the water would
promote French interests.
REPRESSIVE LAWS 283
OVERCONFIDENCE OF THE FEDERALISTS
Adams's attitude toward France has the approval of posterity.
Unfortunately, his political principles were as narrow as those of other
federalists. Like the rest of his party, he wished to enforce
respect for public officials, and he resented the vast amount p^*1!18 s
of abuse which came from the republican editors and views°.
writers. As many of these men were of foreign birth,
some of them fugitives from their own countries, he felt that they
ought to be restrained. Their activity during the year war was immi-
nent with France was the basis of a charge that they were French
spies ; and on that basis it was easy to conclude they should be sent out
of the country. From this conviction proceeded four laws of congress
passed with the support of extreme and moderate federalists.
The first related to naturalization. A law of 1 795 made five years of
residence necessary for naturalization. To most federalists this seemed
too short, and many would have withheld the right entirely.
But the words of the constitution seemed to imply that ^onA^ *
naturalization should not be denied, and it was at last
agreed to require fourteen years' residence, with the provision that
naturalized persons must have declared their intentions five years
before the right could be operative. The law was resented by the
republicans, and the provisions of 1795 were restored by a law enacted
by them in 1802.
The second law dealt with aliens in times of peace. It gave the
president the power to order out of the country any alien whom he
thought dangerous to the welfare of the country. If he
were not obeyed, he might order the person concerned to La^s r
be imprisoned for three years, and if such a person should
return after going away, imprisonment might be inflicted at the will
of the president. This act was to continue two years.
The third act concerned aliens in time of war. They might
be ordered out of the country or imprisoned as long as the pres-
ident chose. The act was limited to the duration of a war. The
republicans deplored loudly the fate of the " poor aliens," whose
safety was thus put at the disposal of the president. In time
of war or an invasion he was to have the power to issue a proc-
lamation declaring what classes of aliens should be allowed to
remain in the United States, and the federal courts were to see
that it was not defied. Many Frenchmen left the country when
the law was about to pass, which is probably all it was expected
to accomplish. No attempt was made to apply either alien law to
those who remained.
The fourth act dealt with American citizens, who denounced the
administration or upheld France. It made it a high misdemeanor
284 ADAMS AND DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
"unlawfully to combine" against the legal measures of the govern-
ment, to impede any officer in the execution of his duty, or to at-
tempt to form any conspiracy, insurrection, or unlawful
tion Law" assembly against the administration. The penalty was to
be imprisonment not more than five years and a fine of not
more than $5000. It also made it a misdemeanor to issue a false or
malicious writing against the president or congress in order to stir up
hatred against them. For this offense the defendant, on conviction, was
to be fined not more than $2000 and imprisoned not longer than two
years. With some difficulty the republicans and moderates introduced
into the law a clause allowing the accused to prove the truth of his
assertion. The first of these four acts was passed June 18, the last on
July 14, 1798.
Many persons were indicted under the sedition act : only ten were
brought to trial, and all of these were convicted. The most notable
case was that of Dr. Thomas Cooper, then an editor in
tions6for~ Pennsylvania. He was arrested for saying that President
Sedition. Adams was incompetent and had, as president, interfered
to influence the course of justice. In our day we should
hardly notice such a charge, so freely is the conduct of even the highest
official held up to ridicule and condemnation. He was tried before
Chase, a federal judge, who displayed, as in all such cases, the greatest
amount of partisanship. Cooper offered to prove the truth of the
charge by summoning Adams and some members of congress as wit-
nesses; but they refused to attend. In default of such evidence he
was convicted, fined $400, and sent to prison for six months. Adams
was willing to pardon him, but the prisoner refused to petition for
pardon unless the president acknowledged wrongdoing in giving out
a letter Cooper had written him. The president would make no such
acknowledgement, and the sentence was not remitted.
Every man convicted became a martyr to free speech, in the eyes
of the republicans. The issue came up in the election of 1800 and had
great weight in convincing the voters that the federalists were drunk
with power. All these repressive laws were, in fact, ill-advised. They
rested on the theory that the people should not be free to discuss, as
they chose, the actions of their rulers. European governments, as
Chase pointed out in the case of Dr. Cooper, exercised the right to
punish libel ; but the European governments were not republican.
Punishing a citizen for political utterances is a bad policy in a govern-
ment resting on popular suffrage.
The republicans believed the alien and sedition acts an invasion
of the personal rights which, as they held, were properly within the
sphere of action by the states. They also decried the creation of an
army under the control of the aggressive Hamilton. It seemed to them
that by a system of loose construction the federalists would concentrate
the powers of government in the hands of president, congress, and the
REPLY OF THE REPUBLICANS 285
federal courts, and reduce to a much lower rank the authority of the
states, to which the republicans looked as the guarantee of the rights
of the individual. The federalists, as in 1787, replied that the rights
of the individual would be as safe at the hands of the general govern-
ment as at the hands of the states. The reply did not satisfy the re-
publicans, who demanded a strict interpretation of the constitution.
Some of them despaired of checking the plans of their opponents, and,
recurring to an idea entertained by some of the representatives of
the large states in the convention of 1787, proposed to Jefferson to
begin agitation for the secession of Virginia and North Carolina, in
order to establish a great Southern republic into which the power of
the trading states of the North would not enter. Such a movement
would almost surely have the support of Kentucky and Tennessee;
Georgia would probably support it with her control of the great un-
settled Gulf region ; and it was hardly to be doubted that it would
eventually carry with it the state of South Carolina, in which the
federalist families of the seacoast held only temporary supremacy.
The whole region was more than half of the national domain, giving
to the North all the vast unsettled Northwest. It had, however,
only 40 per cent of the entire population, and its political strength
was still less proportionally through the provision that only three-
fifths of its slaves counted in representation.
These suggestions were rejected by Jefferson. We ought not, he
said, to become discouraged because of the triumph of opponents,
but endeavor to overcome it by political means. Then
he unfolded his plan. Believing that all the states had the
same interest in protecting their authority, he would unite
them in a crusade against national concentration. He secured the
cooperation of Madison, and each wrote resolutions condemning the
recent enactments of the federalist congress and pointing out in what
ways the rights of the states were threatened. Madison's resolutions
were adopted by the Virginia assembly. Jefferson's were intended for
North Carolina, but the elections of 1798 in that state showed federal-
ist gains in the legislature, and he would not send them thither for
adoption. They were placed in the hands of friends in Kentucky,
where republicanism was strong, and passed the legislature of that state
by a large majority.
The purport of each set of resolutions was the same, although the
Kentucky resolutions used language more explicit and emphatic.
Both sought to find in the states a power to stay the general
government in its assumption that it could interpret the pac* Theory,
constitution. Suppose a controversy exists as to whether
the union or the state should exercise a certain power, who shall de-
termine it ? The federalists asserted that the supreme court had the
decision. They stood by the idea that the constitution was made
by the people and that the national authority rested on popular con-
286 ADAMS AND DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
sent as truly as the state authority. Jefferson and Madison declared
that the states founded the national government by making a compact
whose terms were expressed in the constitution and that it was for
the states, the creators, to determine when the compact was broken.
Both sets of resolutions declared that the alien and sedition acts,
and some other recent legislation of congress, violated the consti-
tution, and called on the states for cooperation in preventing their
execution.
By what means should the state's veto be given ? Virginia was dis-
creetly general on the point. If ungranted power was exercised, said
she, the states could and should " interpose for arresting
Correction t^ie Pr°gress °f the ev^> and for maintaining within their
respective limits the authorities, rights, and liberties ap-
pertaining to them." Interposition by the states might be construed
as calling a convention to amend the constitution, as provided in the
constitution. But Kentucky was more explicit. The states, said
her resolutions, founded the union for specific purposes and gave it
expressed powers, reserving all authority to themselves which they
did not grant to the union ; an exercise of ungranted power was illegal ;
the union was not a judge of its own powers ; and each party to the
compact of the union is a judge of the terms of union, as in all cases
of compact where there is no common judge. In accordance with this
principle they declared the alien and sedition acts and certain other
laws of congress "void and of no force."
In the hot debates of the convention of 1787 nothing was said
directly about the compact theory. Virginia and most of the South
then stood for a national government on a popular basis,
th?ft>m°act eyidently thinking their greater size would enable them
TheorynP to control it. Except for equal representation in the
senate and the tenth amendment reserving to the states
all powers not granted to the national government, there was no
specific limitation of nationality in the constitution. If the convention
had held so important a view, it can hardly be doubted that it would
have defined it. Neither Jefferson nor Madison, in fact, claimed that
words in the constitution, except the tenth amendment, supported the
compact theory. It was a deduction from extra-constitutional sources.
No government with a due respect for its own authority will accept
in practical matters a principle so purely speculative.
Both Jefferson and Madison were experienced politicians. They
did not expect the federal government to accept their view and re-
linquish its pretended authority. But they believed that
state resolutions were powerful means of calling attention
to the federalist tendency toward concentration. Although
the two sets of resolutions were sent to the other states in the
union, they did not expect them to be accepted by the federalist
then generally dominant in the Northern legislatures. But they
NULLIFICATION FORESHADOWED 287
thought the attention of the voters would be called in the most striking
way to an evil they believed to exist with good effect on succeeding
elections. Madison asserted in his old age that the Kentucky and Vir-
ginia resolutions were planned for political effect. When the republi-
cans came into control of the government two years later, they made
no effort to amend the constitution in accordance with the compact
theory.
All the states north of the Potomac, through their legislatures,
made replies unfavorable to the resolutions, some of them expressed
in terms hardly polite. None of the legislatures of
states south of Virginia voted on them, probably because ^t?tude °*
the republicans thought it wise to let well enough alone, states.
When the Northern replies were received, Kentucky and
Virginia passed resolutions reasserting the views in the first sets.
In those now announced by Kentucky occurred the sentence: "A
nullification, by those sovereignties, of all unauthorized acts done under
color of that instrument, is the rightful remedy." This is the only
appearance of the word "nullification" in any of the resolutions, but
the essential idea 'is in the first set passed by Kentucky.
Thirty years later it came up again in the Nullification
movement in South Carolina, whose promoters thought
that stressing the similarity of their doctrines with those of 1798 would
draw Virginia to their side.
OVERTHROW OF THE FEDERALISTS
The congressional elections of 1798 came while the country still
looked for war with France, and the results favored the federalists.
But that party was still divided into radicals and moderates,
the former led by Pickering with the support of Hamilton,
the latter led by Adams with the strong support of Marshall
and a group of Southern federalists in the house. When the president
threw over the war policy of his party in the spring of 1799 he had the
support of the moderates, and the extremists lost a valuable political
issue. They expressed their contempt for Adams openly, which only
divided his party more than ever. The split became more evident
when Adams, in 1800, dismissed Pickering and forced McHenry to with-
draw from the cabinet because they refused to carry out his policy with
regard to making a treaty with France. He retained Wolcott, equally
guilty with the men dismissed, because he did not know the extent
of Wolcott's treachery. In Pickering's post he placed Marshall,
who was not popular in the North, and the dispossessed faction began
to plot to defeat the reelection of a president who showed them so much
hostility. As it was evident that the federalists would take Adams
for their candidate in 1800, this dissention augured little for party
success.
288 ADAMS AND DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
Meanwhile, the republicans were united for Jefferson. The Vir-
ginia and Kentucky resolutions gave them a strong principle on which
to appeal to the voters, and they strengthened their position
United1^ * ky criticizing the administration at every possible point.
Preparations for war had involved heavy expenses, the
national debt had grown during the eleven years of federalist control,
and this gave ground for charging the party with extravagance. The
evident desire of Hamilton to make the new army permanent induced
the charge that he leaned toward militarism. In March, 1800,
congress ordered the dismissal of the new army, and this was a blow
at the extreme federalists. The assertion of the right to impress
American sailors aroused great feeling against England,
Principles which reacted against the party which had usually stood
by that country. Beneath all the arguments drawn from
these and other sources was the continual assertion that the federalists
stood for the rule of a selfish upper class, dominated by the capitalists,
while the republicans represented the mass of the people. The asser-
tion was generally true. The federalists had ignored the popular
nature of American government, and Jefferson at last had organized
the great mass of farmers and working people in a party which would
correct recent tendencies toward class domination. It was the first
of several great periodic popular upheavals by which the people have
shown that they mean the government to rest on the will of all the
people.
In this campaign the nominating caucus was fully developed. In
1796 republican and federalist senators and representatives, acting
for their respective parties, held conferences and recom-
mended presidential candidates to the people. But their
action was not accepted as binding the party leaders; for although
the electors generally favored the caucus candidate for president there
was much scattering in the vote for vice-president. Early in 1800 cau-
cuses were again held. Adams was recommended by the federalists,
and his friends insisted that the entire party was bound to support
him. When Hamilton and his faction showed a contrary purpose they
were pronounced party traitors. The republicans had their own in-
ternal jealousies. Virginia expected to carry most of the South for
Jefferson, but she needed the support of a strong Northern state, for
which purpose New York seemed best suited. Clinton, of that state,
did not like the Virginia leadership, as was shown in the convention
of 1787 ; but at this time he was held in check in New York by Aaron
Burr, able, but distrusted by many men. Burr was willing to make
alliance with Virginia, and in 1796 he was supported as the regular
candidate for vice-president. But in that year he received only 30
votes to Jefferson's 68, and only one of the thirty was from Virginia.
He felt he was badly dealt with, and in 1800 demanded assurances
that he would be supported equally with Jefferson. His terms were
THE ELECTION OF 1800 289
accepted by the caucus and by the party ; and for many years there-
after the decision of the caucus was considered binding on the party.
In the autumn of 1800 the differences between Adams and Hamilton
precipitated a disastrous factional fight. Adams, frank by nature,
expressed himself freely about the opposition of the ad-
verse faction. As several members of the group lived Hamilton's
in Essex county, Massachusetts, he dubbed them the ttg^^te
" Essex Junto." Hamilton was stung to the quick. He Adams,
thought his own position in the party threatened, and wrote
a pamphlet for secret circulation among the federalists, in which he
declared that his friends did not constitute a British faction, as
charged by Adams. Had he stopped there the result would not have
been bad ; but he went on to attack Adams, recognized party leader,
and the gleeful approbation of his friends shows that they thought
the best part of the affair would be the destruction of the president.
The pamphlet fell into the hands of the republicans, who republished
it with exaggerations, and thus forced the author to issue an authentic
copy. Then the world believed that Hamilton had violated his party
allegiance. There followed a reaction more damaging to Hamilton
personally than to his opponent. Each man had his followers, and
they became so embittered toward one another that party success
was impossible.
While the country was still talking about this incident, the election
was held. Adams got all the votes from New England, 39 in number,
10 from New Jersey and Delaware, 7 of Pennsylvania's
15, as well as 5 of Maryland's 10, and 4 of North Carolina's
12 — in all, 65. One elector in Rhode Island, fearing dent, 1800.
treachery on the part of the extremists, voted for Adams
and Jay, so that Pinckney, running with Adams, had only 64 votes.
Jefferson had all the other votes, a total of 73. Burr, who ran with
him, had the same number, and as neither had the highest number of
votes cast, there was no election, and the house of representatives
must select a president, the delegation of each state having one vote.
The republicans had a majority of the electoral college, and the
people had voted with the intention of making Jefferson president
and Burr vice-president. Would the house execute the
popular will, or would it act on its own judgment ? The
federalists were of the latter opinion, and made a plan to
carry their own states for Burr with a hope of bringing
him into the presidency while Jefferson got the second place. In a
caucus of their party they carried through their plan. Burr pro-
tested against it, but in such weak tones that it was thought that he
was privy to the scheme. It is hardly probable that the federalists
would have supported him without some kind of promise in their
behalf, though this does not mean that Burr meant to keep such a
promise once he was president. When the house came to act, Jefferson
2QO ADAMS AND DOWNFALL OF THE FEDERALISTS
had eight of the sixteen states and Burr had six, two being divided. Then
Hamilton showed that moral quality which raised him in great crises
above party. He disliked Jefferson, but believed him better than
Burr, whom he well knew to be faithless to promises. Through his
efforts the federalist representatives from Vermont, Delaware, and
Maryland were induced to refrain from voting, and on the thirty-sixth
ballot, February 17, 1801, Jefferson received the votes of ten states
and was declared president-elect. Burr never forgave Hamilton his
part in the election and, although vice-president, was thenceforth an
ill-disposed partner in the republican administration. This situation,
which caused so much anxiety at the time, was responsible for the
adoption of the twelfth amendment, 1804, by which electors voted
specifically for president and vice-president.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
General secondary works for Adams's administration are the same as those for
the preceding chapter. The same is true for the original sources and for the writ-
ings and biographies of leading men. On special phases of the administration the
following works are valuable :
The Kentucky and Virginia resolutions : texts are in American History Leaflets,
No. 15, and in MacDonald, Select Documents (1897) ; also in Elliot, Journal and
Debates of the Federal Convention (1830), IV, App., pp. 357-388, which contains
also the second resolutions with the replies of some of the states; Anderson,
Contemporary Opinion of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions (Am. Hist. Review,
V, 45, 225), contains a full discussion; Warfield, The Kentucky Resolutions of
1798 (1887), a narrative history with brief mention of the Virginia resolutions;
Powell, Nullification and Secession in the United States (1897), has a chapter on the
resolutions of 1798; Loring, Nullification, Secession, etc. in the United States (1893),
combats the theory that the constitution is a growth ; and Bassett, Federalist System
(1906), chap. XVIII.
On the alien and sedition acts, see accounts in the Histories by MacMaster,
Avery, Hildreth, and Schouler; Bassett, Federalist System (1906) ; Rives, Madison
(1859-1868) ; Hunt, Madison (1902) ; Randall, Jefferson (1858), partisan; Tucker,
Jefferson (1837), defends Jefferson; Adams, C. F., John Adams, 2 vols. (1871),
the federalist side.
On party politics: Gordy, History of Political Parties, 2 vols. (ed. 1904), deals
with French situation at length; Stanwood, History of the Presidency (1898),
chap. V, a good summary of the elections of 1800 and 1801 ; Morse, A. D., Party
Revolution of 1800 (Am. Hist. Assoc. Report, 1894); Ibid., The Politics of John
Adams (Am. Hist. Review, IV); Farrand, The Judiciary Act of 1801 (Ibid., V);
South Carolina in the Presidential Election of 1800 (Ibid., IV), contains letters from
C. C. Pinckney; also lives and writings of Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, and
Madison.
On the naval operations of the time : Maclay, History of the United States Navy,
3 vols. (rev. ed., 1898-1901); Maclay, History of American Privateers (1899);
Spears, History of Our Navy, 5 vols. (1897-1898), a popular narrative.
For Independent Reading
Morse, J. T., Life of John Adams (1885) ; Maclay, History of American Priva-
teers (1899) ; Weld, Travels through the States of North America and Canada, 2 vols.
(1799), very popular when published; and D wight, Travels in New England and
New York, 4 vols. (1821-1822), an excellent book.
CHAPTER XIV
INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS UNDER JEFFERSON
AND MADISON
REPUBLICAN REFORMS
FROM the beginning of his administration Jefferson rejected the
ceremonials which his party had denounced, and which the federalists
defended on the ground that they created respect for the
government. The carriage of state with six horses was sim* licit 1C
discarded, and he rode horseback and unattended through
the streets of the capital, like any other well-mounted citizen. The
formal weekly receptions became levees to which any citizens who
chose might come unannounced. The annual speeches to congress,
which reminded the republicans too pointedly of the king's speech
to parliament, became written annual messages, reports of the
executive on the state of the nation. Federalists ridiculed these
changes, but the people were pleased.
The inauguration was equally simple. Jefferson came to Washing-
ton as a private citizen, lodged at a tavern, and just before noon
on March 4 walked up Capitol Hill, accompanied by a
group of friends, to take the oath of office administered by auguration
John Marshall, a strong and determined federalist, whom
Adams a few weeks earlier had appointed chief justice. His inaugural
address has long been considered a great state paper. Good citizens,
he said in effect, must recognize the right of the majority to rule, but
the majority must not oppress the minority. It was time to lay aside
the bitterness of controversy and to remember that political intol-
erance was as bad as religious intolerance. Differences of opinion
are natural, but federalists and republicans are alike Americans and
should unite to preserve the union and representative Conciliation
government. He pleaded in noble language for peace,
cooperation in developing the resources of a great country, and
patriotism and good will in realizing the blessings of liberty. These
words were calculated to pacify the fears that the republicans would
overthrow the foundations of society, so sedulously aroused by the
federalists in the late campaign. It was Jefferson's dearest wish to
conciliate his enemies, especially those in the North, who had been led
to believe him an atheist and something of an anarchist.
291
292 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
He announced his principles in terms his followers never forgot.
He wished to see, he said, "a. wise and frugal government, which
shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave
Principles. tnem otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of in-
dustry and improvement, and shall not take from the
mouth of labor the bread it has earned." He enumerated many means
of achieving these ends, among them " equal and exact justice to all
men," " honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliance with
none," the preservation of the rights of the states as the best guardians
of domestic concerns, the support of the union "in its whole consti-
tutional vigor," "the supremacy of the civil over the military author-
ity," the rights of popular election as the only arbiter short of revolu-
tion, the sufficiency of a well-established militia, payment of the
national debt, and economy in public expenditures. So deeply did
these principles sink into the minds of the people at large that no later
party or candidate has dared to repudiate them.
The new cabinet was wisely chosen. Madison became secretary of
state, Albert Gallatin, the best financier in the party, became secretary
of the treasury, General Dearborn, of Massachusetts,
Cabinet was secretary °f war> Levi Lincoln, of the same state,
attorney-general, and Robert Smith, of Maryland, secre-
tary of the navy. The postmaster-general, Gideon Granger, of Con-
necticut, was not then in the cabinet, but the post was important
because of the many subordinates. Assigning three of these places
to New England shows how much it was desired to conciliate the people
of that section. Dearborn and Smith were not strong men, but
Jefferson did not propose to make much use of army or navy.
In their day of power the federalists were very bitter toward the
republicans. They called them "the rabble," filled the offices with
their own partisans, appointed only their friends to the
federal judgeships, and in February, 1801, created a number
Office. ° °f new courts, spending their last moments of power in
filling them with their own followers. Their opponents
were naturally exasperated, and came into office eager for spoils.
Jefferson wisely withstood the demand ; for he saw that the thing for
his party to do was to dispel the charge that it would overthrow the
established order. He refused to remove officials unless it was shown
that they were guilty of misconduct or of partisanship. He was thus
able to prevent wholesale removals, which disappointed some of his
hungry supporters. He refused to deliver commissions for the
"midnight appointments," that is, the court officials under the act
of February, 1801, which Adams had signed but left undelivered in the
executive offices. At his suggestion congress repealed this act in
1802. On the other hand, Jefferson appointed his own followers,
saying when as many republicans were in office as federalists he would
continue the parity.
GALLATIN AND THE FINANCES 293
Next, he turned to the national debt, which under the federalists
had grown from $77,500,000 to $80,000,000. Jefferson was pledged
to reduce it and gave Gallatin a free hand. That careful
financier examined his resources and concluded that the
debt could be paid in sixteen years. The revenue then
yielded $10,600,000 a year, of which $4,500,000 went for
interest, $5,500,000 for army and navy, and the rest for general ex-
penses. Gallatin proposed to pay $7,300,000 a year for interest and
to curtail the debt, and as the ordinary expenses could not well be
lessened he would effect most of the saving by reducing the army and
navy. At the outset he encountered a difficulty in the loss of $650,000
of the revenue, because the republicans were pledged to abolish
internal revenue duties. Thus it happened that he had but $2,650,000
for the support of army, navy, and the civil establishment. This
sum he divided with the greatest care. To the army he allowed
$930,000, to the navy $670,000, which left $1,050,000 for ordinary
expenses. This made it necessary to reduce the army to a mere
handful and to tie up in the dockyards most of the ships of the navy.
Jefferson was pleased. He did not like a standing army, and con-
sidered a navy a useless toy which, as he said, might well
be assembled in the eastern branch of the Potomac, where
the ships " would require but one set of plunderers to take
care of them." Many congressmen winced under Gal-
latin's economy ; but he was inexorable, Jefferson supported him, and
the plan was adopted.
The result justified Gallatin's hopes. At the end of a year the
revenue was nearly $3,000,000 more than he had expected, which gave
him a comfortable surplus. In 1803 we purchased Louisi-
ana, paying $i 1,250,000 in bonds and $4,000,000 for claims
(see page 299). Gallatin announced that he could pay the
latter out of the surplus and that the new bonds would
postpone the payment of the debt only eighteen months. In 1804
congress ordered the construction of a frigate to replace the Phila-
delphia, lost at Tripoli (see page 296), and all eyes turned to Gallatin
for the money. He would not take from the funds set aside for the
debt, and congress had to lay a special duty, the "Mediterranean
Fund." In 1805 the revenues rose to $14,000,000, and in 1806 to
$14,500,000, yielding a surplus of $6,000,000. Many congressmen
thought the time for economy was now past, but Gallatin and Jef-
ferson urged patience, promising if the policy of economy were fol-
lowed for two years longer there would be an ample reserve and at least
$5,000,000 for such uses as congress might deem fit. 1807 was another
fat year, and the surplus was now $7,600,000, and the debt, including
the bonds paid for Louisiana, had been reduced from $92,000,000 to
$69,500,000. In 1808 the embargo was in force, revenues fell off,
and this splendid progress was halted.
294 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Gallatin's financial policy pleased the mass of thrifty people. It
was that of the careful husbandman, who, finding himself overwhelmed
with debt, sets aside from his annual income a sum neces-
Gailatm and sarv to liquidate his obligations within a reasonable time
xlftxuilton 5 *" • ji i i* i*
Contrasted. anc* ngidly reduces expenditures accordingly. It looked
to the ultimate extinction of the debt, on the principle
that freedom from debt is as good for a nation as for an individual.
In contrast with it was the policy of Hamilton, who thought little of
paying the debt and much of making the nation strong enough to
weather financial storms. He would have a navy to protect commerce,
which would increase the revenues, manufactures to build up the
industrial efficiency of the country, and a strong capitalist class to
promote the development of the nation's resources. He looked
farther into the future than Gallatin, but he did not appreciate so
well the desires of the average citizen.
Jefferson's first term saw a remarkable and probably an unexpected
development of the power of the federal courts. Asserting the right
to interpret the constitution, they began to declare null
TheRepub- jaws both of congress and the state legislatures (see page
the Judf- 357)- As the judges were federalists, it seemed that the
ciary. opposition, ensconced in this seat of power, were defeating
the will of the people expressed in the elections. The case
seemed more difficult, because the constitution afforded no other way
of removing a judge than impeachment, which must be for "treason,
bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." But if the senate,
as a court of impeachment, chose to consider partisanship in a judge
a misdemeanor, no power could gainsay them. So clear was this that
the republicans determined to proceed, believing that if they estab-
lished the principle that the senate could remove the judges, future
partisanship in that quarter would be avoided.
The first case was that of Pickering, judge of a district court in New
Hampshire, a man whose inebriety had led to insanity. He was
impeached and removed from office in 1803, and the people approved,
although it seemed singular that insanity was pronounced a mis-
demeanor by the highest court in the land. Then the republicans
turned to Judge Samuel Chase, of the supreme court. He was a
violent partisan, as his conduct in the cases under the alien and sedi-
tion laws in 1800 showed. He expressed his views openly, and in
1803 declared to a federal grand jury in Baltimore that the republicans
threatened the country with mob rule. At this the house impeached
him, and the senate sat as a tribunal. John Randolph, an able but
erratic Virginian, was chief prosecutor on behalf of the house. He
included so many charges besides partisanship that opinion rallied to
Chase and the impeachment failed. It was believed that a contrary
verdict would have been followed by the impeachment of Marshall.
As it was, the republican attack on the courts was checked, and the
A NAVAL WAR 295
chief justice remained in a position to exert a powerful influence
upon the development of constitutional law.
THE WAR WITH TRIPOLI
For many years Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli laid tribute
on trade in the Mediterranean, and the powers of Europe acquiesced.
After the revolution our ships began, also, to be seized,
and we were forced to buy treaties with handsome presents
of arms and money. First and last we paid enough
money in this way to build several excellent ships, but for all that
the freebooters were not satisfied. In 1801 the pacha of Tripoli cut
down the flagstaff of our consulate as a declaration of war, because
Tunis received richer presents than Tripoli; and about the same
time Algiers showed symptoms of ill will. Jefferson desired peace,
because, like Washington in 1795, he felt we were not strong
enough to make war on a great power. But this policy did not apply
to Tripoli, and early in 1801 he sent Captain Dale with four ships, the
President, Philadelphia, and Essex, frigates, and the Enterprise, a
sloop of war, to teach the Barbary States to respect us.
Dale could not attempt land operations, and when the Tripolitans
collected an army and drew their navy up under the guns of their forti-
fications, he could only establish a blockade and cruise
along the coast. Fortune, however, threw in his way an operations
enemy's cruiser, which was quickly taken. Because
congress had not declared war, Jefferson had not authorized captures,
and the conquered ship, disarmed and dismantled, was allowed to
escape to Tripoli, where her crew told such stories of American ferocity
that the pacha's soldiers were filled with a respectful terror. In 1802 a
second squadron went to the Mediterranean, but did nothing effective.
These meager results disappointed the people at home, and the com-
mander, Captain Morris, was dismissed the service. In 1803 a third
commander of squadron went out, Captain Preble. With the aid of
some small boats borrowed from the king of Sicily, who was also at
war with the pacha, he conducted a bombardment of the city of
Tripoli, but inflicted little damage. Preble remained in the Mediter-
ranean during the winter, and showed a determination to isolate the
enemy completely. In the spring of 1804 he received important
cooperation from William Eaton, an eccentric but patriotic American
in Egypt, who, without authority from his government, sought Hamet,
dispossessed elder brother of the pacha, and set out from Egypt to
capture the government of Tripoli by land. The pacha
was a usurper and yielded rather than endanger tran-
quillity at home, although the army of Eaton and Hamet
was only 500 men. In 1805, when the eastern half of his kingdom
had been won over, he concluded a treaty, retaining his throne, but
296 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
agreeing to remain at peace with the United States in the future with-
out tribute, and to surrender all Americans held in his country.
Nothing was done in behalf of Hamet, who was now forced to retire
from the positions he had won, but the next year we allowed him a life
pension of $200 a month.
The war with Tripoli had a wholesome effect on the other Barbary
States, and they were content to remain at peace without further
presents. It also gave the navy exercise in a theater of
actual war, and brought it added prestige at home and
abroad. It contained incidents of heroism which fired the
American imagination. Two of them especially were long remem-
bered. While Preble held Tripoli closely invested from the sea he
sent Lieutenant Somers among the enemy's ships in the
Seiners' ketch Intrepid, loaded with bombs and powder, to explode
it in their midst and escape if possible. The American
ships waited at a distance for the return of the brave crew. After
a time they saw the ketch blow up when in contact with the Tripoli-
tans, but neither Somers nor his men came back. Their fate was not
known, but it was believed that he leaped into the magazine with a
lighted torch, devoting himself to death to accomplish the object for
which he was sent out.
The other adventure was more successful. The Philadelphia,
pursuing the enemy too eagerly, went aground at the mouth of the har-
bor of Tripoli, and Bainbridge and his crew were taken.
Shortly afterwards the ship was floated by the enemy and
taken under the protection of their guns, where she
frowned unpleasantly at the Americans in the ofHng. Stephen Deca-
tur, commanding a ketch, sailed boldly into the harbor, boarded the
Philadelphia, filled her with combustibles, set her on fire, and escaped
in his ketch through a shower of badly aimed shots from land batteries
and the ships in the harbor. He was a cool and capable officer, and
was promoted for his conduct. In 1815 he returned to the Mediter-
ranean with a formidable squadron and dictated favorable treaties
with. the Barbary States at the mouth of the cannon.
THE PURCHASE OF LOUISIANA
In 1800 most Americans believed that the settlement of the eastern
half of the Mississippi basin would inevitably be followed by the
acquisition of the western half. Acute alarm was occa-
The Im- sioned in Washington's administration when it was
Loufshma? thought England was about to get a foothold in this
region; for while no one feared Spain's control of the
region in question, England's ownership was another matter. For-
tunately, the danger soon passed, but apprehension was again aroused
when in the spring of 1801 it began to be reported that Spain had
NAPOLEON AND LOUISIANA 297
transferred Louisiana to the powerful and aggressive Napoleon, who
intended to build up a vast colonial power in its borders. The rumor
soon became a certainty, but as months passed and the province
remained in the hands of Spain the public mind remained calm.
Late in 1802 it was violently agitated when news came that the
Spanish governor in New Orleans had withdrawn the right of deposit
granted in the treaty of 1795. The public construed this as a change
of policy in anticipation of the new regime in Louisiana, and the West
was for seizing the mouth of the river before it was too late. Jefferson
wisely thought the action of the governor unauthorized,
and restrained the popular wrath while he negotiated,
Five months later he was informed by the Spanish minister
that the right of deposit would be restored, and this removed the
question from the range of possible war and left it freely in the field
of diplomacy.
It was the president's plan to impress France with our seriousness
in the matter, and to that end he used the strongest language. Let
France know, he said, that the nation which held the mouth
of the Mississippi was our enemy, and if Napoleon per-
sisted in his purpose we should "marry ourselves to the
British fleet and nation," so that England and the United States,
cooperating for supremacy at sea, would hold at their mercy the
revived French colonial establishment. He let the British minister
see what he meant, and at a dinner paid him such marked attention
that the French minister made it a subject of comment in his letter to
Talleyrand. Generally speaking, Jefferson was pacific, not because
of cowardice, as his enemies thought, but because he abhorred war
and thought it was usually undertaken through unreasonable impulse.
His vigorous attitude toward France shows how positive he could be
when he considered a vital issue at stake. Meanwhile, Livingston,
our minister in Paris, was instructed to sound Napoleon in regard to
the purchase of the Isle of Orleans and West Florida. It is not
probable that Jefferson thought the proposition would succeed, but
it offered a point of departure in the negotiation.
Unknown to him, events in Paris were shaping themselves more
favorably than he dared hope ; and to understand them we must go
back to the treaty of San Ildefonso, October i, 1800. By
that agreement Napoleon induced Spain to transfer
Louisiana to him in exchange for the Grand Duchy of fonso.
Tuscany, which, elevated to the kingdom of Etruria, was
to be given to the Duke of Parma, son-in-law of the king of Spain,
when a general peace was made in Europe. Napoleon promised not
to sell the territory thus acquired to any nation but Spain, and it was
agreed that later aegotiations should be entered into for the cession of
West Florida. The treaty was kept secret for the time being, but its
essential features were soon known. This vast acquisition of land
298 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
was to be the basis of a revived colonial empire, which the rising
Napoleon thought would increase his popularity with the glory-loving
French people.
Before that scheme could be realized the island of Santo Domingo
must be conquered. Here Toussaint L'Ouverture, at the head of an
army of blacks, was fighting to maintain the power he had
. f°unded. Every step he took in the progress of military
despotism seemed but a shadow of the course of a greater
despot in France. The world took notice and smiled, whereat Na-
poleon, deeply irritated, felt the greater need of suppressing the man
who made him ridiculous while he defied French authority. In
February, 1801, Napoleon made the treaty of Luneville and was at
peace with the continent. England continued the war with little
heart, and brought it to an end a year later in the treaty of Amiens.
This period of victory offered the triumphant First Consul the op-
portunity to bring Santo Domingo back to obedience.
January, 1802, arrived in Santo Domingo Leclerc, one of the best
French generals, with an army of 10,000, and the war of reconquest
began. Toussaint wished to use guerilla methods, but his
Defeated officers overruled him. After three months of struggle
they began to yield to the blandishments of Leclerc, think-
ing that it booted little to suffer further in behalf of the black emperor.
At last Toussaint himself ventured to surrender, being assured of
personal safety. After six weeks of fancied security he was arrested,
sent to France according to the orders of Napoleon, and in less than a
year died in a fortress in the Jura Mountains. Then Napoleon sent
an order to restore slavery, his intention from the beginning. But
for that, he might have ruled the island and proceeded with his colonial
plans in Louisiana. As it was, the negro laborers rose to a man. Tous-
saint's officers were true to Leclerc, but all the efforts of the combined
white and black forces did not check the onslaughts of the
Defeated maddened laborers who saw slavery restored in the neigh-
boring island of Guadeloupe. Then yellow fever appeared.
In three months 24,000 men, soldiers and sailors, had died, and Leclerc
demanded 17,000 more, with avast sum of money, before the work of
subjugation was done. He announced that this could only be done
by killing over half the lower classes, male and female, above twelve
years of age ; and he thought that peace once restored, annual revolts
might be looked for in the future. Before such a stupendous under-
taking even Napoleon's resolution quailed, and it was decided to
abandon the island.
Louisiana was now useless to Napoleon, and although
Purchased ne ^a(^ assured Spain he would not sell it, he looked
around for a buyer. April 10, 1803, he told Marbois,
head of the treasury, to see if the United States would entertain
an offer to buy. The shrewd Talleyrand, scenting an opportunity for
LOUISIANA ACQUIRED 299
profit, anticipated Marbois, and the following day opened the matter
with Livingston, our minister. The two were discussing the purchase
of the Isle of Orleans when Talleyrand said, "What would you give
for all Louisiana?" The suggestion was unexpected, but Livingston
concealed his eagerness, and said that as he expected a special envoy
from the United States in two days, he wished the matter to be
deferred that long. The envoy was Monroe, whom Jefferson had sent
to try to purchase the Isle of Orleans and West Florida. On the thir-
teenth Marbois and Livingston talked until midnight about the affair,
the former inquiring if we would pay 60,000,000 francs in cash and
also assume claims of Americans against France worth 20,000,000
francs. Livingston said this was too much, but he felt inwardly that it
was a good bargain, and after some haggling the purchase was made on
that basis. The treaty was signed on May 2, although it was ante-
dated to April 30. It increased the national domain by 140 per cent.
The transaction pleased Jefferson, but also alarmed him. A strict
constructionist, he could find no authority in the constitution for
purchasing foreign territory, and he began to prepare
an amendment granting congress the right. He seems to
have forgotten this when he proposed to b,uy the Isle of
Orleans. An intimation from Paris that Napoleon might change his
mind before an amendment could be adopted caused the president
to abandon his plan, and the treaty was duly ratified October 21,
1803. December 20, to the gratification of every American in the
Mississippi valley, the stars and stripes was hoisted over New Orleans.
Now arose the question of boundaries. According to the treaty we
received "the colony or province of Louisiana, with the same extent
that it now has in the Hands of Spain, and that it had when
France possessed it, and such as it should be after the
treaties subsequently entered into between Spain and
other states." The words were from the treaty of 1800. Livingston
asked Talleyrand what they meant. " I do not know," was the re-
ply, "you must take it as we received it." "But what did you mean
to take?" said Livingston, to which the astute Frenchman again
said, "I do not know," adding, "You have made a noble bargain for
yourselves, and I suppose you will make the most of it." At that
time Talleyrand had in his cabinet a copy of the instructions designed
for Victor, who was to have been the first French governor of Louisi-
ana, informing him that the boundary on the west was the Rio Grande,
and on the east the river Iberville, i.e. the eastern border of the Isle of
Orleans. This was quite definite, but it was unknown to Jefferson for
some time, and meanwhile he adopted a theory worthy of Talleyrand
himself.
Before 1762 Louisiana extended to the Perdido, including Mobile,
which as the outlet of a river system reaching from Georgia to Missis-
sippi was greatly desired by the United States. Jefferson saw in the
300 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
words of the treaty, "that it had when France possessed it," an op-
portunity to claim this part of what he must have known was un-
doubtedly West Florida, i.e. Spanish territory, and, in
?Tsett?ed~ Talleyrand's words, he "made the most of it." He com-
municated his opinion to congress, which accepted it, and
passed. February, 1804, the Mobile act, erecting the region
in question into a customs district and annexing it to Mississippi terri-
tory. Lest this lead to war with Spain, Jefferson tactfully located
the customs house for the new district north of the Florida line. His
plan was to hold the dispute in abeyance until Spain was in a war,
and then seize the desired district. The Southwest, to whom the
Coosa- Alabama line of river communication was of the utmost impor-
tance, approved his plan, and thought nothing of the points of national
honor involved. But Jefferson did not trust entirely to the prospect
of war. He would use it, if possible, as a means of forcing Spain to
withdraw, and to that end he hoped to enlist the efforts of Napoleon,
whose influence in Madrid was all but supreme. The French emperor
understood this game and skillfully turned it against the American
president by holding out West Florida when he wished the good will
of Jefferson, and by withdrawing it when his temporary purpose was
accomplished.
DISSENSION IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
By the beginning of 1804 Jefferson's popularity was well established.
None of the calamities prophesied by the federalists had followed
his election. On the contrary, the debt was being paid
Success11 * through Gallatin's wise economy, Louisiana had been
acquired, party rancor was dying, business was prosperous,
and the president manifested a desire to conciliate all sections and
interests. It was also evident that Jefferson directed his party with a
strong hand. He early recognized Burr as a disturbing element and
proceeded to crush him. The character of the New Yorker would
have justified this, to say nothing of his intrigue for the presidency in
1801. Burr was attacked through the New York patronage, which
was sedulously given to Clinton, his bitter enemy. The
His Attitude vice-president was the least submissive of men, and now
toward Burr, began to lean toward the federalists, and this only increased
the difference between him and his party. Finally, he
fell into the net of Pickering and the extreme New England federalists.
They were so bitter against Jefferson that they planned to carry their
section out of the union before his insidious conciliation should warp
it out of their hands. It was an erratic scheme, and probably would
have been rejected by the people, but the schemers decided to make
the attempt if New York, the great commercial state of the North,
could be induced to join them. To that end they approached Hamil-
THE YAZOO CONTROVERSY 301
ton, who rejected their proposals. Then they turned to Burr, who
was complaisant. They got him accepted as federalist candidate
for governor in the spring of 1804, thinking that his own
friends and the federalists would elect him. But now
Hamilton exerted himself, and defeated Burr at the polls
by disclosing the object for which he had been nominated. This
angered the discredited man, and the result was the duel on July n,
1804, in which Hamilton was killed and Burr's political influence
blasted. Jefferson in national affairs and Clinton in state affairs
reaped the fruits of that foolish crime.
A more serious party disturbance came through the opposition of
John Randolph, a vehement and caustic speaker against whom few
members of congress could stand in debate. As chairman
of the ways and means committee in the house he was a
chief exponent of the administration policy. His lofty
manner offended many republicans, particularly the men from the
North, for whom he openly expressed contempt. His ideas were not
always practical, and Jefferson in a quiet way began to oppose the
most impossible of them. Randolph then struck back, the oc-
casion being the Yazoo claims, whose origin goes back to Washing-
ton's administration.
After the revolution Georgia claimed the lands to the Mississippi
by a title formally as good as that by which the other states claimed
their Western lands. She also held that the region involved
in the secret clause of the treaty of 1782 should come to her Companies
because it was originally a part of her domain. The
United States might well dispute the latter claim, but left it in abeyance,
hoping that all the region would soon be transferred to the federal
government. But Georgia wished to realize on the lands, and by
several grants sold them to great land companies, known as Yazoo
companies. The last of these grants, including the others, was made
in 1795 at about a cent and a half an acre. The sale was made by a
corrupt legislature, and the next legislature declared it null. Now
resulted a pretty piece of confusion, in which the Yazoo lands were
claimed by Georgia, the United States, since most of them were in the
disputed region, and the grantees, who held that a state could not
annul a grant for the corruption of its own agents. Georgia was
defiant, and as President Adams did not wish to coerce a state, a
compromise was arranged by which Georgia relinquished the lands to
the federal government, which undertook to erect them into Missis-
sippi Territory, and to pay damages to Georgia and the
A . . ^ J . ^ , , ° ,, , , Compromise
companies. Commissions were appointed for the latter prop<jsedi
purpose, and reported among other things that the United
States should pay Georgia $1,250,000, and the grantees the proceeds
of the sale of 5,000,000 acres of land. In 1803 a bill was before con-
gress to put this compromise into effect.
302 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
It was at this point that Randolph opened his attack on the admin-
istration. He disliked Madison greatly, thinking him a trimmer.
Most of the Yazoo stock was owned by speculators living in the
North, and the representatives in congress, from that
Randolph section, republican and federalist, were anxious to pass
Yazo^Com- ^e ^' Jefferson favored it, probably because he wished
promise. to build up his party in the North. All this aroused the
suspicion of Randolph. He made no objection to reim-
bursing Georgia for her claim, but he denounced the project to pay the
companies. His scathing words defeated the bill at that time, but it
came up again in 1805, when the speculators employed Granger,
postmaster-general, to lobby for the measure. This angered the sharp-
tongued Randolph, whose bitter strictures were now thrust at the
administration which harbored the lobbyist. The republicans were
divided into Yazoo and An ti- Yazoo men, the latter being chiefly
Southerners. They were nearly equally divided, and Randolph was
able to defeat the bill at this time. Although taken up again from time
to time, it was not passed. In 1810, in the case of Fletcher vs. Peck,
the supreme court held that the Georgia grant of 1795 was a contract,
and that the legislature of 1796 could not annul it, and this strength-
ened the cause of the Yazoo men. In 1814, when Ran-
• the dolph was no longer a member of congress, it was voted
troversy. to give the company $8,000,000 in settlement of the
claims, and with this the matter came to an end.
At first Jefferson kept himself clear of the dispute, and he was too
strong to be openly attacked. In 1804 he was reflected president
by 162 to 14 electoral votes, getting all the votes of New
England but Connecticut's. For the support of New York,
Clinton received the vice-presidency. Jefferson, at the
height of his glory, announced in 1805 that he would not be a candi-
date for another term, and it was generally thought he would
make Madison his successor. Randolph and his friends began to
make plans to support Monroe, who had acted with them. While
the breach in the party was thus widened, Jefferson brought before
congress a scheme to acquire Florida, which gave Randolph another
opportunity to show hostility to the president.
While Jefferson deferred occupation of West Florida to a more
favorable time, he renewed diplomatic efforts to get Spain to yield
what we wished ; but to his overtures the king returned a
Jefferson's haughty refusal. In 1805 Talleyrand entered into the
Acquiring affair, communicating an informal suggestion that we
Florida. trust Napoleon to conduct negotiations for the purchase
of all Florida for $7,000,000. He meant that the money
sent to Madrid should find its way into the French treasury to pay
subsidies which Napoleon exacted from prostrate Spain. The sug-
gestion pleased Jefferson, although he hoped to get the Floridas for
JOHN RANDOLPH INSURGENT
303
less than the price named, and December 5, 1805, he sent a secret
message to congress asking for authority to offer $2,000,000. Ran-
dolph, chairman of the ways and means committee, was the man to
move a grant ; but he was obdurate. His influence with the com-
mittee was great, and he induced them to report in favor of measures
of defense, saying he would never vote a penny to buy territory which
we justly owned. The house overrode him, voting after a long debate,
72 to 58, that the money be placed at the president's disposal. But
so much time was consumed in discussion that the opportunity
was lost. When the suggestion was made, Napoleon needed
money. Within four months he won the victories of Ulm and Aus-
terlitz and dictated the treaty of Pressburg, and his coffers were
overflowing. He accordingly refused to bring pressure to bear on
Spain.
From that time, 1806, Randolph was in open opposition. Now
came an unexpected development. His followers would support him
when he appeared as a mere critic of one of the administra-
tion measures, but when he was an acknowledged insur- J*1111011^ .
,. „ ,, j Shorn of his
gent they began to fall away, fearing the power and strength,
popularity of Jefferson. Of the ablest and truest were
Nicholson, of Maryland, Macon, of North Carolina, the speaker, and
Monroe. Jefferson sought to detach them from their leader, and
succeeded with the first by appointing him a federal judge. The
second remained unmoved, but the congress elected in 1806 was against
Randolph, and Macon was not reelected speaker. His defeat insured
a new chairman of the ways and means committee. Monroe acted with
Randolph until the election of 1808 elevated Madison, Jefferson's
choice, to the president's chair. In 1809 an arrangement was made,
through Jefferson's aid, to make Monroe secretary of state under
Madison, an agreement consummated in 1811. Randolph, shorn of
his strength, continued to annoy Jefferson. In the house none dared
encounter his withering scorn, and he had his way in debate. The
president wisely ignored the attacks, although he probably winced
in secret under them. The retirement of the annoyer in 1813 to make
place for Jefferson's son-in-law, Eppes, only interrupted Randolph's
career. He was reelected in 1814, and with a short interruption served
in congress until 1829, an able but eccentric free lance and sometimes
a nuisance.
THE SCHEMES OF AARON BURR
When Burr saw his career ended in the East he turned to the West.
Had he settled in New Orleans, or some other city in which a duelist
was not unpopular, he might have risen to professional
and political prominence. But his ambition looked to
larger things, and he wished to found a state of his own in
the West. For such an adventure he had genius in leadership, but he
304 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
lacked men and money. The first he hoped to get in the West and the
latter from either England or Spain.
Historians are not agreed on the nature of his plans. He was
indicted for treason in that he attempted to wrench Louisiana from
the union and set it up as an independent state. Most of
Was Burr s j-^g contemporaries believed him guilty as charged, and
Louisiana? some living historians accept the same view. According
to them he was to collect 1000 men on the Ohio, reach
Lcuisiana about the time the territorial legislature declared the
province independent, and with the connivance of General Wilkinson,
commanding the union forces there, establish his supremacy. It is
known that he tried to get money for this purpose from the English
minister and failed, and that he then tried to get it from Spain, where
he also failed. He promised England to place his new state under
English protection, thus opening a vast field for British commerce.
He told Spain that his state would present a useful barrier between
the United States and Mexico, then in Spanish hands. It is also
known that he was in close conference with Wilkinson, who was cap-
able of any treachery.
The other contention is that his real purpose was to conduct, in
cooperation with a band of New Orleans adventureres, a filibustering
Or Mexico? exPedition against Vera Cruz and Mexico City. He did,
unquestionably, tell some of his followers this was his
object, and he had maps and other information about Mexico which
seemed to substantiate his words. He revealed this plan to some of the
most influential leaders of the West, Andrew Jackson among others,
and won their approval ; for Spain was much hated in this quarter.
To the plainer people of the West he spoke of a colony on the Red
river, where he had acquired a large land grant, but this was ad-
mittedly a subterfuge. The real controversy is as to whether his
conspiracy was aimed at Louisiana or Mexico.1 If it was at the former,
Burr lied when he spoke of the latter ; if at the latter, he lied when he
spoke of the former. Probably we shall never know in what respect
he told the truth. Wilkinson testified that the conspiracy was
against Louisiana; but Wilkinson's word is not ordinarily to be
taken. He was a pensioner of Spain, and was concerned in most of the
plans to separate the Mississippi valley from the United States.
Wilkinson shared whatever guilt Burr incurred, and he was talking
to clear himself ; but this was true of some of those who testified that
Mexico was the objective. It must be remembered, also, that it is
possible that Burr meant to do both of the things alleged. It was quite
within the power of his audacious imagination to hope to secure
Louisiana first and then operate against Vera Cruz.
1 For the view that Louisiana was Burr's objective the best authority is Henry Adams,
History of the United, States, III, chs. 10-14. For the other view see McCaleb, The Aaron
Burr Conspiracy.
BURR'S ACTIVITY 305
Be this as it may, Burr gave himself earnestly to his scheme, going
hither and thither in the West, collecting boats, supplies, and men at
Blennerhassett Island, near Parkersburg, West Virginia.
November 15, 1806, was the date set for their departure. Fajjg °
Rumor was rife all through the West that he would attack
New Orleans, and in October, he was indicted for treason in Kentucky.
As no positive evidence could be adduced he was acquitted, and con-
tinued his preparations. But the indictment checked volunteering,
and he could not set out on the appointed day. It was an untoward
event ; for at New Orleans the situation favored success, if Burr had
designs there. The legislature was about to meet, and Wilkinson had
taken his army to the Texan frontier, leaving the city unprotected.
If the adventurer had appeared with 1000 men, as he promised, the
city would have been at his mercy. But the men were wanting, and
Wilkinson, able to take care of himself in an emergency, decided to
desert a failing cause. He informed Jefferson of a conspiracy to seize
Louisiana, but concealed his connection with it. He hastened to the
city and noisily gave orders to make the place safe against assault.
The president, meanwhile, received Wilkinson's letter. He had heard
rumors against Burr before that, but took no action, lest friends of the
accused charge him with persecuting a political rival. But now the
charges were definite, and he sent a proclamation through the West
for the arrest of all conspirators. Burr's friends warned him that
it was coming, and hastily gathering all his resources, sixty men and
thirteen flatboats, he set off for New Orleans in the last days of the
year. He still counted on Wilkinson, but when he learned at Natchez
how vain was this reliance he abandoned his followers to Arregt f
their fate, and, disguised, sought to escape through the B"^
forest to West Florida. At Fort Stoddert, when nearly
across the boundary, he was recognized, arrested, and sent to Rich-
mond, Virginia, for trial.
The case aroused wide interest. Chief Justice Marshall presided
at the hearing and John Randolph was foreman of the grand jury
which presented Burr for trial. Both men were bitter Bun..g Trial
enemies of Jefferson, and seemed to wish Burr's acquittal.
By the constitution, treason is levying war against the government, or
giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and two witnesses to the same
overt act are necessary for conviction. Marshall ruled that a man
must be present when the overt act was committed in order to be
guilty of treason within the meaning of the constitution. As Burr
was in Kentucky when his followers assembled on the Ohio river, he
was not guilty as charged, although it was well known that he planned
the whole movement. The ruling was fatal to the prosecution, and
Burr was acquitted. Luther Martin, leading lawyer for Burr and long
an enemy of Jefferson, outdid himself in making it uncomfortable for
the president. One expedient was to summon Jefferson to testify
3o6 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
and to bring certain papers with him. The summons was disregarded
on the ground that the president was not to be at the command of
the federal courts. Marshall was a bold judge struggling
Clash be- to establish the independent power of the judiciary, and
Executiy6 m ^s notaD^e case> m wmch the executive appeared as
and the prosecutor, he went as far as he dared go in his attempt to
Judiciary. make the president do the will of the court. In refusing
this subpoena, Jefferson, as Adams in the case of Dr.
Cooper, 1800, and other presidents at later times, laid out the line
beyond which the court was not to go.
RELATIONS BETWEEN ENGLAND AND THE UNITED STATES
When Burr took up his Western schemes, England and Napoleon
were joined in the final struggle to determine the destiny of Europe.
Each striving to cripple the resources of the other came at
America length to attempts to restrain the trade of neutrals. As
Carrying Napoleon after 1806 was dominant on the continent from
Trade. the Adriatic to the Baltic, the only important neutral
was the United States, whose citizens for a time reaped
large profits from the sale of American products and by carrying
freights between European ports. American ships were rapidly
built, and foreign ships were transferred to American registry, to the
discomfiture of British owners, whose own profits were lessened by the
high insurance they must pay in the dangerous days of French licensed
privateers. The mobile sailor population of the world was also drawn
into the American service, so that not only the British merchant
marine but the British naval ships also suffered for lack
Trade Re- of service. Out of this situation grew regulations to im-
pede the American neutral trade, and a greater activity in
ana im- v . ., » • i • rm \ t
pressments. impressing sailors on American ships. The weakness of
the American navy, under Jefferson's pacific policy,
invited these discriminations.
Impressment rested on inalienable citizenship, held at the time
by all the nations of Europe. America, as a new country, held for
transferable citizenship, and the naturalization laws of
tlie United States were framed on that basis. But in
men. actual practice neither party to the controversy confined
itself strictly to the principle at stake. Sailors on British
ships frequently deserted in American ports, took out naturalization
papers, and shipped on American vessels without much concealment
and with open approval of the American population. Such duplicity
was not to be endured by the mistress of the sea. British ships-of-war
retaliated by boarding American vessels, mustering the crews on deck,
and taking off all whom they chose to declare British subjects. Some-
times they took men who were undoubtedly American born. Some-
ENGLAND AND THE NEUTRAL TRADE 307
times, also, the men they took had forged papers certifying to American
birth. Between these difficulties the ways of Presidents Jefferson and
Madison were hard. Impressment was practiced under the federalist
presidents, and much negotiation occurred to remedy it, but no results
were reached. It recurred with increased energy under Jefferson.
Each instance of this wrong announced in the American papers aroused
the popular wrath and prepared the way to the war of 1812. When
finally the British ships cruised off the American harbors searching all
vessels that came out or went in, it was hard for the president to
restrain the people from acts which must have led to hostilities.
Less irritating, perhaps, but of greater real hardship, was the in-
creasing number of seizures of ships charged with violating British
rules of war. Of these regulations the most noted was
the Rule of War of 1756, declaring that a trade not open
in peace could not lawfully be opened in time of war.
The dispute, as we have seen, came up in Washington's administration,
but it was not settled. American skippers found a way around it by
taking cargoes from the West Indies to their home j>orts, where the
goods became American, and if reexported to Europe as such were
not, as they held, liable to seizure. It was a nice point, but the British
courts allowed it, the rule being laid down in the famous case of the
Polly, 1800, that such goods became American goods and were not
liable to capture if they were landed on American docks and paid
American duties. For some time after the European war reopened,
1803, this rule favored the Americans. So profitable was the trade
that the expense of landing and paying duties was comparatively
insignificant. Then came the complaint of British shippers that the
Yankees used this as a subterfuge to engross all the trade of the
French and Spanish possessions in America. The British government
opened certain ports in their American colonies to the goods of enemy
nations, with the hope that the trade drawn thither would
go thence to England in British ships ; but even this did £a*"
not break up the objectionable Yankee practice. Then
came the decision of the British court in the case of the Essex, 1805,
in which it was held that a neutral ship pleading the right accorded in
the decision of the case of the Polly must prove that in landing her
cargo in a neutral port it was the intention of the owners to make the
cargo neutral goods and not merely to evade the rule of 1756. As
this intention must be shown to the satisfaction of the British courts,
proving it was difficult. Under the new rule, many ships were seized,
and complaints were loud in America. In England the merchants
applauded because insurance rates were now raised for their Yankee
rivals, and the navy was pleased because officers shared in the prizes
seized.
In 1806 died William Pitt, head of the ministry under which this
severe policy was conducted. The changes which followed brought
3o8 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Charles James Fox, long a friend of America, into the foreign of-
fice. He assured Monroe, our minister, that he would endeavor to
have the recent restrictions modified, but warned him not
to exPect payment for the 500 prizes already taken. Even
this concession was difficult to obtain; for the cabinet
as a whole dared not antagonize the merchants and navy by openly
modifying their rules. Then Fox resorted to a subterfuge, known
as "Fox's Blockade," May 16, 1806. A proclamation declared
blockaded the coast of Europe from Brest to the Elbe, but the naval
officers were instructed to enforce it only from the Seine to Ostend.
Neutral ships, therefore, bound for posts between Brest and the Seine,
and between Ostend and the Elbe, were allowed to go undisturbed,
spite of the rules formerly enforced. It was a clumsy way of doing us
a favor, but it left us the Netherlands with the Rhine valley and the
northwest corner of France ; and it might have served until the end
of the war had France acquiesced.
But Napoleon scorned to get his foreign supplies through the con-
nivance of his enemy. Feigning to believe Fox's Blockade effective
for the whole coast line involved, he replied, November 21,
DecreerUn l8o6> with the Berlin Decree, declaring: i. Complete block-
1806. ' ade for all the possessions of Britain in Europe; 2. All Brit-
ish property, public or private, and any merchandise com-
ing from Britain, whoever owned it, to be prize of war; 3. No ship
coming from Britain or her colonies to be admitted into a port con-
trolled by France, and 4. Confiscation for vessels trying to evade this
blockade by false papers. This outrageous decree, for which Fox's
proclamation was no justification, ignored the doctrine of contraband,
and announced, in effect, that its author was greater than international
law. Moreover, he had not a respectable squadron to enforce it.
Only a few minor class ships-of-war were left to France after the battle
of Trafalgar, 1805, and these, darting out of the protected harbors
at the unprotected merchantmen, besides her privateers, were the
only means of enforcing the blockade against the mistress of the seas.
The only redeeming feature of the decree was that it was not enforced
against the United States for nine months after promulgation.
The decree was a challenge to England, and touched her pride.
The reply of the ministry was two Orders in Council, which only in-
creased the distress of the American shippers. The first,
First and January 7, 1807, forbade neutrals to trade from port to
Orders in Port °^ France or her allies. It was a severe blow at our
Council. skippers, who were accustomed to dispose of cargoes in
various markets as prices favored. In April a new election
gave the government a parliamentary majority of two hundred, mostly
country squires chosen on the ground that the church was in danger.
In the tory ministry which now came into power George Canning,
sometimes coarse, sometimes clever, but always patriotic and able,
JEFFERSON'S PEACE POLICY 309
was foreign secretary. November i, six weeks after Napoleon began
to enforce his decree against our shipping, there appeared, in Great
Britain, the second Order in Council. It forbade neutral trade with
the entire coast of Europe from Trieste to Copenhagen, unless the
neutral vessels concerned first entered and cleared from a British
port under regulations to be afterwards announced. Canning thought
France could not exist without American food products, and he ex-
pected by this means to force her to take them by permission of
Britain. But Napoleon did not yield readily. December 17 he issued
the Milan Decree, ordering the seizure of every neutral
ship which allowed herself to be searched by England, or
which cleared from an English port. Beyond this was
nothing that could distress our commerce. Any ship
bound for Europe, except for Sweden, Russia, or the Turkish pos-
sessions, was liable to capture by one side or the other. By the end
of 1807 our merchant marine, distressed on every side, was threatened
with destruction, and loud complaints reached the administration by
every ship from abroad.
JEFFERSON'S REPLY TO EUROPE
Jefferson abhorred war as a means of settling disputes, and thought
most questions could be settled by appeal to interest. Neither he
nor the majority of his party thought the country able to
bear the burden of war. Like Washington, when he pg^,6
accepted the Jay treaty in 1795, they thought it better to
bear the insult offered them than appeal to a course which would in-
crease the national debt, involve great expense for a navy, and put in
jeopardy the independence of the nation. Neither he nor his party
lacked patriotism, but they represented the rural classes and did not
feel the attacks on commerce as keenly as the merchants and ship-
owners, chiefly federalists. All these considerations prompted the
adoption of pacific means of defense.
The first was the non-importation act of 1806, passed to force
concessions from England. It provided that certain specified goods
which could be produced in the United States or in other
countries than England should not be imported from the
ports of Great Britain after November 25 following. The
president did not favor the bill, but accepted it when the
republicans made it a party measure. Randolph opposed it, declaring
with his peculiar vehemence that we ought either to fight or submit
to England. The act was to be followed by negotiations, and Monroe,
minister to England, and William Pinkney, now sent thither as his
colleague, were authorized to make a treaty which would rectify
our wrongs. All this was a reply to the decision in the case of the
Essex. The act did not go into effect until December 14, 1807.
310 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Fox died soon after Monroe and Pinkney began negotiations, and
his successor was less friendly. They did the best they could, but got
no concessions worthy of the name. The treaty they
Futile signed in London, December 31, did not give up impress-
Monroe and ment> Dut insisted that West India products pay a duty of
Pinkney. n°t less than 2 per cent before they be exported to Europe
as American goods, and that European products pay not
less than i per cent duty in American ports before being exported to
the islands. It was to be inoperative unless we bound ourselves not
to abide by Napoleon's Berlin Decree. Thus it seemed that England
dictated our own taxes and that she was bent on driving us into war
with France. Jefferson realized that the treaty would not be ratified,
and would not submit it to the senate. He concealed its terms to pro-
tect Monroe from the criticisms he believed it would bring down on the
negotiators. It showed how futile were the non-importation act and
the hopes from negotiation.
Then Jefferson turned to the embargo, in an especial sense his own
policy. He would keep American ships from the sea until the time of
danger was past, avoid the irritating incidents which were
bar6 o Act likely to arouse the war spirit in his own people, and force
England and France to yield in order to get our products.
He would thus prove that war is unnecessary and that armies and
navies are a useless burden. Congress gave its support, and Decem-
ber 21, 1807, the embargo act was passed. It prohibited the depar-
ture for a foreign port of any merchant vessel, except foreign vessels in
ballast, and required vessels in the coasting trade to give heavy bonds
to land their cargoes in the United States. The president was given
discretionary power to modify the operation of the law in specific
cases, but its duration was made indefinite. Peaceful coercion was
an untried experiment of far-reaching effects, yet it passed the two
houses in four days and was a law before the people understood its
significance. Congress accepted it on the authority of Jefferson at a
time when it seemed that all other measures were futile. If successful,
it would be a brilliant climax of a presidential career in which were
such achievements as Gallatin's financial policy, the purchase of
Louisiana, and the dissipation of partisan bitterness.
The first attempts at enforcement showed that peaceful coercion
was impracticable. Shipowners would not give up a trade which be-
came more profitable as it became more dangerous. They
Difficulty of hurriedly instructed their captains to avoid American ports
the Em- g anc^ *° continue in the carrying trade between foreign
bargo. ports. Those whose ships remained at home in idle-
ness complained loudly, and the law was evaded so
much that two supplementary acts were soon passed to make it
effective (January 8 and March 12). At first the farmers did not feel
the embargo as the traders felt it; for the crops were sold when it
REPEAL OF THE EMBARGO 311
passed. But by the end of summer it came home to them in lower
prices. Products which in 1807 sold unusually high, on account of
the war abroad, now sold unusually low because they could not be
exported. The federalists made much of this discontent, and their
course stimulated it, and thus encouraged evasions of the law. In
the autumn two more enforcing acts were passed. Even a rowboat
was now subject to the law, and collectors of the ports were given
despotic powers over every ship that sailed.
Such was the situation when the election of 1808 occurred. Madi-
son was the administration candidate, C. C. Pinckney had the sup-
port of the federalists, and John Randolph was rallying
his friends for Monroe. The result was 122 electoral
votes for Madison, 47 for Pinckney, and none for Monroe.
George Clinton, who also had 6 votes for president, was elected vice-
president, although he had shown great uneasiness under the Virginia
domination. All New England but Vermont was again in the federal-
ist column, and for this change the embargo was responsible. In the
house the federalists also gained strength, but their adversaries still
held control.
These events, and the increasing defiance of New England, which
seemed ready to take arms if the embargo were strictly enforced,
shook the determination of the republicans, and senti-
ment for repeal began to develop in the party. Jefferson .
observed the trend with great disappointment. He had bargo"
not lost faith in peaceful coercion as a theory, but he was
forced to see that it could not be enforced unless the majority of the
people believed in it, and he was at last brought to sign a bill to super-
sede the embargo by the non-intercourse law of 1809.
It decreed non-intercourse with England and France, ^g^aw
leaving the president to suspend it for whichever of the of lg"09
two nations should first abandon her restrictions. Jeffer-
son signed the bill in much bitterness of spirit, and a few days later
retired from office. The new law left open the trade with every nation
but England and France, and to these our products went
indirectly. For one year this situation continued, the
government trying meantime to effect a settlement by
negotiations. All was in vain, and May i, 1810, a third
act concerning trade, known as "Macon's Bill No. 2," was passed. It
repealed all restrictions on commerce with the two nations, but author-
ized the president to reinstate them for one nation when the other
repealed its offensive decrees or orders. It was a bid for relaxation,
and if accepted by one power was likely to be accepted by the other.
The result showed it to be as futile as the preceding measures. Our
commerce was caught in a bitter conflict between two great states
who would hardly stop cutting one another to pieces to secure the good
will of the United States. Jefferson's embargo had important sig-
nificance in the economic history of the time (see page 349).
3i2 INTERNAL HISTORY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
General Works. Besides the Histories by McMaster, Hildreth, Schouler, and
Avery (see page 2 74) , reference is made especially to Henry Adams, History of the
United States of America during the Administrations of Jefferson and Madison, 9 vols.
(1889-1891), a work unsurpassed for scholarship and clearness, rather extensive for
the general reader, but a source of comfort to the student. It has the New England,
though not the federalist, point of view, but honesty and good judgment are always
evident. Volumes 1-4 deal with the years 1801-1809. A short work of much
merit is Channing, The Je/ersonian System (1906). Hart, American History told
by Contemporaries, 4 vols. (1897-1909), is also useful. For sources, see as above.
Gallatin's reports are full, and may be found in The American State Papers,
Finance, I and II. As one proceeds in the story the volumes in the same series
on Public Lands and Commerce and Navigation become additionally important.
For writings and biographies of the prominent men of the time, see above,
page 275. Other important biographies are : Dodd, Life of Nathaniel Macon
(1903) ; and Battle, ed., Letters of Nathaniel Macon, John Steele, and William Barry
Grove (Univ. of North Carolina Bulletins, No. II). On John Randolph two books
are available, the first able but hostile, the second favorable but undiscriminating.
They are : Adams, H., John Randolph (1884), and Garland, Life of John Randolph
(1850). Adams, H., Life of Gallatin (1879), and Stevens, Albert Gallatin (1884),
present in a convenient form the services of the secretary of the treasury in this
period. For extended references on Jefferson see Channing, The Je/ersonian
System, 274-276.
The Louisiana Purchase. The earliest considerable account is Barbe-Marbois,
Histoire de la Louisiane et de la Cession (1829, and an English translation in 1830).
It was written by one of the negotiators, and defends the sale of the province. The
documents on the American side are full and can be found in the American State
Papers, Foreign, II and Public Lands, I. Later American accounts are : the chap-
ters in Henry Adams, History of the United States, I and II ; Ogg, The Opening of the
Mississippi (1904) ; and Ga.ya.rre, History of Louisiana, 4 vols. (revised edition, 1885).
Btirr's Scheme. The usual view that Burr wished to revolutionize Louisiana is
best stated by Adams, History of the United States, III. The view that Mexico
was Burr's objective is defended with ability in McCaleb, The Aaron Burr Con-
spiracy (1903). The important documents are in Robertson, Report of the Trial
of Colonel Aaron Burr, 2 vols. (1808), Trial of Colonel Aaron Burr, 3 vols. (1807-
1808) ; Safford, The Blennerhassett Papers (1864), containing Blennerhassett's
journal and correspondence with Burr ; Wilkinson, Memoirs of my Own Time, 3 vols.
(1816), presents the author's side, but he is sp much distrusted that even his cor-
respondence is not to be accepted.
Relations with England and France. On this subject Adams, History of the
United States, IV, V, and VI, is very valuable. Many newly unearthed documents,
American and foreign, are given at length, and the story is carried forward with
spirit and breadth of treatment. The American State Papers, Foreign, II, contains
valuable documents. Wheaton, The Life, Writings, and Speeches of William
Pinkney (1826), and Pinkney, The Life of William Pinkney (1853), also contain
valuable information. For a list of the important pamphlets which the contro-
versy called forth, see Channing, The Jeffersonian System (1906), 283-285. Stu-
dents interested in the subject should examine the writings of Madison, Monroe,
Jefferson, and Gallatin (see above, page 255).
For Independent Reading
Maclay, History of the United States Navy, 3 vols. (1898) ; Spears, Story of the
American Merchant Marine (1900), in which the conditions of the sea-born ^ com-
merce is well treated. Basil Hall, Voyages and Travels (1895), covering the years
1802-1812, valuable for the experiences of British naval ships on the American
station. Memoirs and Letters of Dolly Madison, Wife of James Madison (1886),
interesting for social life in the early days in Washington.
CHAPTER XV
THE WAR OF 1812
ORIGIN OF THE WAR
BOTH England and France seized American ships under the restric-
tions on commerce just described, but as England had the stronger
navy her offenses were more numerous. The losses from
this source fell most heavily on the merchants and ship- J seizures*
owners, chiefly federalists and friends of England, who Alone>
wished for peace with that country. Since Macon's bill
No. 2 removed the restrictions on trade, pleasing the maritime class,
and as we could not well fight France for doing what her rival did to a
much larger extent, the prospect for peace would have been brighter
in 1 8 10, if seizures had been the only source of irritation. But
another source of resentment was impressments, practiced, it is true,
by both nations, but on a much larger scale by England.
Here the brunt of wrong fell on the sailor class. As
story after story was told of native Americans carried
away into the hard service of the British navy, the popular ire rose
higher and higher. British ships took sailors from ships in American
harbors without regard to the neutrality laws, and lay in wait off the
chief ports of the Atlantic coast, searching the vessel that came out.
All the old hostility which lingered in American minds from the days
of the revolution, or sprang up in connection with Jay's negotiations,
now flared up again, and the nation drifted toward war.
Had England been wise, much of this irritation would have been
avoided. It is true she did not wish war with the United States.
Engaged in a life and death struggle to stay the advance of
Bonaparte in Europe, she had adopted the policy of starv-
ing her enemy into subjection. If our merchants tried to
evade her regulations, so much the worse for them, and if she seized
stringently the sailors she claimed as hers to enable her to man her
ships-of-war, so much the worse for the sailors. It was no time,
thought Canning, for the niceties of international courtesy. But
America did not desire war, and had Canning's position
been asserted with more consideration, war would probably
have been avoided. As it was, there occurred several harsh
incidents, which Jefferson and Madison were willing to overlook,
but which goaded the popular mind until they resulted in a wave
313
3i4 THE WAR OF 1812
of hatred which the administration could not resist, until congress at
last forced the president to begin the struggle against his best judg-
ment. In this sense George Canning was the chief author of the war
of 1812.
The first of these incidents was the Chesapeake-Leopard affair, 1807.
At that time impressments were very frequent. An English squadron
searching for some French ships came into Lynnhaven
i. chesa- Bay, near Norfolk, Virginia, and anchored there. Several
Pard Affair °^ their san*°rs deserted, some of them Americans pre-
1807. viously impressed into the British service. At that time
the naval ship, Chesapeake, was taking on her heavy guns
preparatory to her departure for the Mediterranean. It was reported
that she had shipped some of the deserting British sailors, and Admiral
Berkley, commanding the British ships on the station at Halifax,
ordered that she be intercepted at sea and searched. Her captain,
Barren, was ordered by the president to take care that no British
deserters were in his crew, and thought he had fulfilled his instructions,
but one man under an assumed name escaped his notice. Just be-
fore he sailed, the British ship, Leopard, came to Lynnhaven Bay
with Berkley's orders. June 22 she followed the Chesapeake, as the
latter stood out to sea, came alongside at close range, and signalled
that she had dispatches. Barren allowed her to send a boat, and an
officer coming on deck handed him Berkley's order with the announce-
ment that if deserters were aboard, they must be handed over. Bar-
ron replied that he had none of the kind mentioned. He should have
prepared for action, but the letter from the Leopard was not explicit,
and he did not realize he was about to be attacked. A few minutes
after the officer left the Chesapeake the British ship came within pistol
shot, having the advantage of the wind, fired a shot across the Chesa-
peake's bow, and followed it by a broadside. The two ships were of
nearly equal strength, and the British captain did not wish to lose the
advantage of beginning his work before his opponent was ready.
Barren was entirely unprepared for battle, but hastened his efforts
while his helpless vessel sustained for fifteen minutes the enemy's fire.
All he could do was unavailing, and he hauled down his colors with
three men killed and eighteen wounded. Ere they touched the deck,
one of his officers, for the honor of the flag, managed to fire one gun,
the only reply the Americans made to the cruel punishment they re-
ceived. Then the British came aboard, found three Americans who,
having been impressed on a British ship had deserted and joined the
Chesapeake, and the one native British deserter who had enlisted under
an assumed name; and these were taken off. The American ship
made her way to Norfolk, where her arrival was received with an out-
burst of rage which spread over the country until the whole nation
quivered with excitement comparable to that which ninety-one years
later was aroused by the destruction of the Maine. Barron was sus-
IRRITATING INCIDENTS 315
pended for five years because he had not been prepared for action, and
Jefferson exerted all his art to prevent immediate war.
He recognized the strength of the popular indignation, and for a time
showed energy. He promptly issued a proclamation ordering British
public ships out of American waters and forbidding Ameri-
can citizens to furnish them supplies. He sent off to course°
London a demand for reparation, for the punishment of
Berkley, and for the relinquishment of impressments generally.
When Canning received this demand he offered to investigate the in-
cident and do what was just, but he refused to consider the demand
that the British government give up impressments. The British press
and public, long accustomed to resent the pretensions of the Yankee
nation, applauded his position and demanded war, if war was neces-
sary to support England's supremacy at sea. Here was a direct
challenge, but Canning thought the president would not
accept it. He recalled Berkley, who had acted without r"
J . -,-, . . Attitude,
orders, but a proclamation was issued warning British
seamen who had been "enticed" into foreign service to return to their
allegiance, declaring that if taken on board enemy ships they would
be treated as traitors, and commanding naval officers to seize them on
merchant vessels and to demand them from captains of foreign naval
ships. At the same time it was decided to transfer negotiations in re-
gard to the recent affair to Washington, where Erskine was the British
minister.
When this was known in America, congress was in session, and the
embargo act was soon passed. It showed Jefferson's purpose to
negotiate while he employed "peaceful coercion." Four
days after it passed George Rose arrived to treat for the ?i .R?se's
settlement of the Chesapeake affair. He was instructed jgSJ""1'
to demand the withdrawal of Jefferson's recent proclama-
tion as a condition precedent to negotiations. After some hesitation
the president agreed that this should be done and asked Rose to show
his instructions. The latter unwillingly complied. He would restore
the impressed seamen, he said, if we would disavow Barron for en-
couraging the desertion of British sailors. This was distinctly what
Barron had not done ; to concede it would put us in the wrong, and the
negotiations came suddenly to an end. Probably Canning had not in-
tended that they should have a more successful course. Rose re-
turned to England, the recent outrage was not redressed, three Ameri-
can-born sailors remained in a British prison, "peaceful coercion"
was demonstrating its inadequacy to deal with the situation, and a
large portion of the people were coming to the conviction
that nothing but war would force the stubborn Canning
to a reasonable attitude. But Rose discovered one fact
while in America to which he later clung tenaciously. He learned how
much opposed to war was the federalist party in New England, and he
3i6 THE WAR OF 1812
made a fast friend of Senator Timothy Pickering, of Massachusetts,
who led him to believe that in case of war the states east of the Hudson
might be withdrawn from the union and attached to England. Pick-
ering cherished the idea, and his correspondence with Rose in the years
immediately following gave prominent Englishmen a mischievous
idea of American affairs.
Rose's short course ran through the three first months of 1808. He
left British interests in the hands of the regular minister, Erskine, a
, whig, a friend of conciliation, and a man who saw with
Treaty. * S a^arm tne rising tide of hostility toward England. Ad-
vising Canning that war feeling was increasing, he was in
the spring of 1809 instructed to make arrangements for a treaty which
would remove all the differences between the two powers. The terms
proposed were very hard, but Erskine believed himself justified in
modifying them, and concluded a treaty so favorable to America that
Canning repudiated it at sight. Before this was known in America
many ships loaded with produce set sail for Europe, assured that
British restriction would be inoperative when they arrived. Their
disappointment was keen, but Canning allowed them to return home
without seizure since they sailed under misapprehension.
Erskine was now recalled, and Jackson, a narrow and obstinate
Briton, took his place, with the promise that he should retain the post
at least a year. He began by tactlessly telling Madison
4. Ja^~ that Erskine had been overreached by the American
Mission. government. He was asked to withdraw the expression,
and when he refused received a curt notice that no further
communications would be held with him. He departed from Washing-
ton in high rage, leisurely visiting Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York,
and Boston, where the federalists received him with demonstrations of
sympathy. According to promise, he was allowed to hold his position
until September, 1810. It was evident that England cared little to
preserve peace with us, and all the time the popular resentment in-
creased.
At this point the course of our story turns to France. Napoleon's
attitude toward the United States was as unfair as England's, but his
power to injure was smaller because of his weakness at
TheBa- sea jje chiefly exercised it in seizing our ships by two
R^boufflet notakle decrees. Just after he knew of the embargo act,
Decree. he ordered, in the Bayonne decree, April 17, 1808, the
seizure of all ships in French ports flying the American
flags. Such vessels, he said, could not be truly American, since the
embargo act forbade them to leave their home ports. A great deal of
property was thus confiscated, and the American government spent
much time trying to get payment for it. March 23, 1810, Napoleon
issued the Rambouillet decree, confiscating every ship which had
entered a port of France or her dependencies since the preceding May
NAPOLEON'S PERFIDY 317
20. Under it several hundred vessels were taken. The procedure
was justified on the ground that the non-intercourse act forbade French
ships to come to American ports and authorized their seizure if they vio-
lated the act. It was really taken because Napoleon needed money,
which he got in large amounts from the sale of the confiscated property.
Before America fully understood this deliberate perfidy, Napoleon
was planning another stroke, the object being to lead us to war with
England. With Macon's bill No. 2 in mind he caused
Madison to be told that the Berlin and Milan decrees would 2ap^le°nk
be repealed November i, 1810, his understanding being Madison. S
that congress had abandoned non-intercourse and would
oppose England's restrictions. We had not undertaken to resist
England, but only to apply non-intercourse to her commerce. Madi-
son should have remembered this, but he was anxious to open the
suspended commerce, and too readily accepted the promises of France.
November 2 he gave notice that France had removed her restrictions,
and March 2, 1811, congress reimposed non-intercourse on England,
as Macon's bill No. 2 contemplated. It was soon evident that
Napoleon had hoodwinked our president ; for by a system of licenses
and a high tariff he made it as hard as ever for the American ships in
French harbors. England could see this as well as anybody. She
refused to. repeal her Orders and complained that we favored France,
her enemy. By this time American feeling was so strong against
England that our people did not care how she felt. We forgot to
blame Napoleon, as we well might have done, and the government
had begun to take a stiffer tone toward Great Britain. It was just
at this time, April i, that Monroe, according to the agreement made in
1809, succeeded Smith as secretary of state. He had suffered many
indignities while minister in England, and he must have taken keen
delight in the rising tide of resistance which he observed in the country
and the administration.
A clear manifestation of this altered spirit came soon afterwards.
In May, 1811, the British frigate Guerritre was impressing sailors off
Sandy Hook, and the American frigate, President, Captain
John Rodgers, forty-four guns, was ordered to repair to the The Pre*'~
post and stop the practice. He sailed promptly, passing ^iweeftt
the scene of the affair of the Chesapeake and Leopard, four ^n.
years unredressed by England, and May 16, off the Virginia
coast, encountered a British ship of war headed southward. Hoisting
his colors, he gave chase, thinking the Guerriere was before him. At
sunset he was overhauling the fugitive, who at last came to in the
twilight but refused to give her name. Suddenly a shot was fired
which struck the President's mast. Immediately the American ship
began to fire, and after a fifteen-minute battle the stranger ceased to
fire and reported herself in distress. Rodgers lay to until morning,
when, to his disappointment he learned that he had not attacked the
318 THE WAR OF 1812
Guerrtere, as he supposed, but the Little Belt, about half his size. Her
captain alleged that the President fired first, but the evidence to the
contrary was overwhelming. A short time later a new British minister
arrived in Washington, announcing that he was instructed to settle
the Chesapeake-Leopard dispute; but the nation, glowing with enthusi-
asm for Rodger's action, cared little for the overture. The minister
was asked if the trade restrictions would be relaxed, and when he said
"No" his work was at an end.
Additional hostility to England was engendered by the outbreak,
in 1811, of Indian troubles in Indiana, where the white settlers were
now steadily penetrating. By a treaty of 1809 the Indians
Harrison of central Indiana ceded a large tract of land on the Wa-
North^ bash. It was the ninth similar step since the treaty of
western In- Greenville, 1795. The more patriotic Indians opposed
dians, 1811. this relinquishment of their ancestral lands, and declared
the treaty of 1809 illegal. They found leaders in two
brothers, Tecumseh and "The Prophet," men of exceptionable ability,
who lived peaceably with an agricultural tribe where Tippecanoe Creek
joins the Wabash. They had great influence with the neighboring
tribes and united them in a league to oppose further encroachments by
the whites. In 1811 Tecumseh went to the South to form a similar
league among the Creeks, Cherokees, Choctaws, and Chickasaws.
Taking advantage of his absence, William Henry Harrison,
xfppecanoe. g°vernor of Indiana Territory, with 800 men, marched into
the region recently ceded and came at last to the town on
the Tippecanoe. Here he was surprised in the early morning by about
400 Indians, and lost 188 killed and wounded before he beat off the
attack.. As the foe retreated and left their village to be burned, Harri-
son was hailed victor throughout the Northwest. The Indians had re-
ceived arms and ammunition from Canada, and this was taken as an
additional wrong from England.
Meanwhile, the popular resentment had expressed itself in the elec-
tion of 1810, when seventy new members were sent to congress, most
of them replacing advocates of peace. Before this the
Changed leaders in congress were men whose experience went back to
j^ement the time of the revolution. They had seen so many dark
Election of days tnat tnev feared to hope for bright ones. The new
1810. men were young. Their leaders were Clay and Johnson of
Kentucky, Porter of New York, Grundy of Tennessee, and
Lowndes, Cheves, and Calhoun of South Carolina ; and the average age
of the seven was only thirty-four. They had fought for their election
most vigorously, and felt bitterly toward the old Virginia
Party a grouP °f leaders, who never quite forgave them their vic-
tory. Both factions called themselves republicans, but
the newer men rejected many of the more theoretical principles of the
old school. They believed that the national honor had been insulted,
GROWING SPIRIT OF RESISTANCE 319
and demanded war, their eyes meanwhile being cast at Canada.
They began their work by electing Clay speaker and securing the im-
portant committees.
Before congress met on November 4 Madison accepted the demands
of the war party, and his annual message recounted our wrongs and sug-
gested measures of defense. The old leaders opposed
this, but the federalists, thinking to embarrass their an- Madison
cient enemies, joined the new party in raising an army of J^War*
25,000 men and in putting the navy on a war footing. An party.
attempt to raise taxes, however, resulted in failure, and the
government was left to support war, if war came, by means of a loan.
For that kind of an operation it was seriously handicapped
by the refusal of the preceding congress to recharter the u* s- Bank
United States bank. The many state banks could not chartered,
make the loan of $11,000,000 now called for. At this
time the bonds could not be sold in Europe, and the federalists, who
were chiefly the trading class, would not take them because they op-
posed the war, and when the bids were opened only $6,000,000 had
been subscribed. Lack of money was most serious throughout the
war about to begin.
In May, 1812, a republican caucus renominated Madison for the
presidency. He had the support of the war party and his small per-
sonal following ; but the friends of Samuel Smith did not
attend the caucus. In New York, where the two Clintons Madiso.n
dominated the republicans, much jealousy of the Virginia
supremacy appeared, and a movement was rapidly form-
ing for a coalition between the malcontents and the federalists, in
opposition to Madison. George Clinton died in April, and Virginia,
turning away from the alliance with New York, took Massachusetts
for her Northern yoke-fellow, offering the vice-presidency to Elbridge
Gerry, who had recently been republican governor of that common-
wealth. Clinton's death, however, did not end the plans of the New
Yorkers. His nephew, De Witt Clinton, took up his mantle, was
nominated for the presidency by the New York legislature, and ran
the race with the endorsement of the federalists. When the votes were
cast in the following November Madison had 128 of the 217, eight
from Vermont and all those from the states south of the Delaware.
Had Pennsylvania not given him her twenty-five votes he would have
been defeated.
England now saw plainly the drift of the United States toward war.
To the American protests was added the fact that the English people
were suffering for food products. Wheat sold at nearly
four dollars a bushel, and the trade with the continent
went on under a system of forged licenses, both British
and French, for which honest Englishmen could only blush. Under
these conditions there arose a powerful demand that the Orders in
320 THE WAR OF 1812
Council be repealed, and the ministry were urged to relieve a disas-
trous situation before an American war should be added to the other
burdens. At last they were willing to yield, if the French government
would state publicly that its decrees had been repealed. No such
statement was expected, but the offer showed that the government was
weakening. May n, 1812, the prime minister, Spencer Percival, who
had stood stoutly for the Orders, was assassinated by a fanatic.
The friends of America, led by the brilliant Henry Brougham, now
pressed harder than ever for repeal. Then came news
that the United States had declared an embargo for two
months as a preliminary step to war. With the nation
clamoring for peace, and with Brougham eloquently plead-
ing the cause of the starving people, the new ministry at last gave
way, announcing on June 16 that the Orders would be withdrawn, a
promise which they redeemed on the 23d.
The British relaxation came suddenly, and the Americans were un-
prepared for it. The war party was in control in congress, and carried
the president with it. June i he sent a war message which
occasioned a short and sharp debate, followed on June
June 1 8. 1 8 by a declaration of war for which the vote was 19 to
13 in the senate and 79 to 49 in the house. Had there
been a cable the war would probably not have occurred. As it was,
there was a feeble attempt to patch up differences when news came
from London, but feelings were now too much aroused for such a step,
and the project failed. Fourteen of the senators and 62 of the rep-
resentatives who voted for war lived south of the Delaware. Only
1 1 of those who voted against it lived in that region, and of these but
two were republicans. Thirty-three federalist representa-
Unite? * ^ves issued an address declaring the struggle unjustifiable.
Thus the war was sectional, and began with dissension in the
nation. The war party thought that harmony would be restored once
fighting began, but the event showed how much they were mistaken.
In fact, the country was not ready for war. The president, timid,
diplomatic, and unable to control the politicians around him, could not
inspire with energy an administration in which the only
Weakness first rate man, Gallatin, was harassed out of his peace of
ministra*1' mmd ^y enemies nxhis own party. The army, neglected
tion^Army, by tne republicans, was without trained officers. The
and 'Navy/ West Point Academy, authorized in 1802, had as yet
yielded none of the fruits for which it later was distin-
guished. Officers who had served in the revolution were now too old
for effective duty, and the new political appointees were pompous and
inexperienced, and lacked the respect of the privates. The navy, dis-
dained by Jefferson, had only the frigates built by the federalists, and
some smaller vessels constructed for use against Tripoli, less than
twenty in all. But their officers were excellent, and the sailor popula-
PLAN OF THE WAR PARTY 321
tion was as good as could be found in the world. The gunboats Jeffer-
son built for harbor defense were not able to take the sea. The
treasury was without money, and the country shuddered at the thought
of higher taxes. Loans were the only resource, and these were difficult
with the moneyed class opposed to war and the money markets of
Europe prostrated by the struggle then raging there. The young
leaders in the house realized these difficulties, and strove to surmount
them. They carried through congress a bill to raise the
army, now a little more than six thousand strong, by 25,000
men, and another bill to authorize the president to call out
50,000 militia. They also asked for an addition to the
navy of twelve seventy-fours and twenty frigates, but this was re-
fused. When they moved war taxes there was further denial, and they
were forced to content themselves with a loan of $11,000,000. All
this happened early in 1812.
The war party planned a vigorous campaign in Canada and the oc-
cupation of Florida, if Spain, England's ally in Europe, should make
war on America. They thought the Canadians would
willingly throw off the British yoke in order to unite with FJ^a *
the great republic to the southward, and they believed
that the war would end quickly and victoriously. They expected the
Atlantic ports to be blockaded, and trade to be driven from the sea,
but so much had been endured on that score that a little more suffering
would hardly make a difference. Kentucky and the Northwest were
keen for the Canadian campaign, while Tennessee longed for the signal
which would open to them the Coosa- Alabama line of communication,
with free exit at Mobile. As it turned out, there was no
war with Spain, but Mobile was occupied without resist-
ance. On the other hand, England's plan, more slowly
formed, was to beat back the attempt on Canada, to blockade the
coast, and crush our ships at sea, and in the latter part of the war to
carry offensive operations into the home of the war party, Virginia and
Louisiana. Into these four phases, therefore, the actual fighting of the
war of 1812 was resolved.
THE STRUGGLE FOR CANADA
The Canadian defenses were along the lakes, a series of posts from
Mackinac to Lake Champlain. It was proposed to break this line at
the eastern end, while supporting expeditions carried it at
Fort Maiden, near Detroit, at Fort Erie, on the Niagara j anadjan
river, and at Kingston. Those places taken, all the Defense,
columns would concentrate on Montreal. It was thought
the campaigns would be accomplished with little or no opposition.
Had the commanders been good and the cooperation perfect, such
might have been the result.
322
THE WAR OF 1812
The first move was from Detroit, where General Hull commanded
with nearly 2500 men. In July he crossed the Detroit river and
Hull marched toward Maiden. General Brock commanded the
Detroit. British force and made heroic efforts to defend the position.
Hull moved slowly, gave him time to concentrate, and
then fell back because he dared not attack a force half the size of his
own, nearly half of his opponents being Indians. The army was dis-
gusted, their want of confidence in their leader only increased
Hull's panic, and when Brock, following the Americans to Detroit,
surrounded the place and demanded its surrender, the fort, garrison,
and supplies, to his surprise, were handed over without an effort to de-
fend them. Hull pleaded that he was surrounded, his communications
cut, and his men likely to be butchered by the hostile Indian if he
resisted to the end. His position was indeed perilous, but a braver
Dis ra ful man wou^ ^ave made some effort to defend himself. A
Surrender. year an<^ a ^a^ ^ater ^e was convicted by a court martial
of cowardice and neglect of duty and sentenced to be shot,
but the president pardoned him on account of honorable revolutionary
services. The loss of Detroit left the frontier open to Indian raids
and created disgust for the men directing the war at the time when
there ought to have been enthusiasm.
ON THE CANADIAN BORDER 323
Nor was there more success at other parts of the border. The
column sent against Montreal got under way after much delay and in
November reached the Canadian line, whereupon the
militia refused to leave the country and were marched Repulse of
back by their commander, Dearborn, to winter quarters
at Plattsburg. The other column failed also. Assembled columns.
on the Niagara to the number of six thousand it essayed to
carry the war into Canada under General Stephen Van Rensselaer, a
New York politician and an inexperienced general. The regulars
under General Smythe refused to cooperate, and Van Rensselaer was
driven back from an attack on Queenstown with a loss of 1000. Then
Smythe was placed in command. He was as bad a commander as
his predecessor, and his attempted invasion in November was repulsed
so easily that he was freely accused of cowardice. In these three for-
ward movements the private soldiers showed ability, but their com-
manders and many of the other officers were evidently unfit for their
posts. By the middle of 1813 all these commanders were removed.
After Hull's defeat William H. Harrison, of Tippecanoe fame, was
placed over the Western army, which he organized as fast as a poor com-
missary department permitted. Late in the autumn of
1812 he was in a position to move forward, and marched to Harrison's
attack the British at Maiden. He sent General Win- £%£**
Chester forward to make preparations at the rapids of the Northwest.
Maumee, fifty miles from Maiden. While there, Win-
chester was called to the help of Frenchtown, on the Raisin river,
thirty miles beyond. He hurried forward with 900 men, took the place,
but could not fortify it. January 22, 1813, he was attacked and de-
feated by Proctor commanding more than 1000 whites and Indians.
Surrounded in the snow, the Americans were cut down or massacred by
the Indians, until the remainder, over 500 in all, were forced to sur-
render. At night the savages, crazed by liquor, fell on the wounded
prisoners, whom Proctor left without guard, and killed them to a man.
The act infuriated the men of the frontier, and "Remember the
Raisin " became their battle cry for the rest of the war. Harrison was
forced to give up his advance, but he did not lose the confidence of the
Western people.
Throughout the spring and summer of 1813 he made ready for
another attack, and in September was before Maiden with
4500 men. By this time the Americans had gained con- Recovered
trol of Lake Erie, and the British, not daring to with-
stand a siege with no help possible by water, burned Detroit and
Maiden and retreated. Harrison pursued them on
Canadian territory, forced a fight at the river Thames,
and won a signal victory. One of the slain was Tecum-
seh, who from the first had aided the British. It was the first
successful battle in the long announced invasion of Canada, and
it gave peace to the Northwest.
324 THE WAR OF 1812
For this valuable result the gunboats on Lake Erie deserve much
credit. Hull's surrender showed that we never could retake Detroit
as long as it could be supplied by water. Accordingly
vfctory on everY effort was made to build and buy ships for service
Lake Erie. on tne lake- BY September, 1813, Captain Oliver H.
Perry had six vessels well armed and manned. On the
loth he met and destroyed the British lake fleet, slightly weaker than
his own. His dispatch announcing the victory ran: "We have
met the enemy and they are ours. Two ships, two brigs, one schooner,
and one sloop." The victor became very popular.
Holding Lake Erie and Detroit did not mean the conquest of
Canada. Montreal was still to be taken, and for that purpose General
James Wilkinson was called from New Orleans to take
pSureS°n'S command of the larSe force at Sackett's Harbor, near
tife s" ° Kingston. He was to march down the St. Lawrence, sup-
Lawrence, ported by another army led by General Wade Hampton
by way of Lake Champlain. The only virture in Wil-
kinson's appointment, which was due to his friendship with Armstrong,
now secretary of war, was that it made way for Andrew Jackson's
command in Louisiana in 1814. Wilkinson was incompetent, and
Hampton, who was a good general, cooperated with him reluctantly.
Wilkinson moved slowly, as if he did not desire to succeed. Hampton
reached an advanced position on the Chateaugay, held it until con-
vinced that the other army would do nothing, and then returned
to winter quarters at Plattsburg, on Lake Champlain. Wilkinson,
who had fought some skirmishes without success, then fell back
to Sackett's Harbor. Hampton, who resented being placed under the
incompetent Wilkinson, resigned, and his superior was at length
removed from command. Thus ended in failure the second year
of fighting on the New York border. The most valuable thing accom-
plished was that through defeat the army was seasoned to fighting,
the old generals had been weeded out, and a number of capable
minor officers had been given an opportunity to show their abilities.
Of the latter were Major General Jacob Brown, in command of the
forces on the Niagara, and Brigadier General Winfield Scott, who
served under him, an excellent drill master and a bold fighter.
The year 1814 began gloomily for the Americans. They were dis-
couraged by a war which brought so little success, New England
seemed on the point of withdrawing from the union,
Effect^? volunteering had nearly ceased in the Atlantic states,
Defeat. an<^ tne treasury was empty. Moreover, Napoleon was,
checked in Europe, and England might be expected to
carry on the war with more energy in America. All this sobered
the people, and as the months passed men began to forget that it was
a republican war and to realize that the life of the nation was at
stake.
BETTER FORTUNE
325
They were encouraged by news from Brown. All thought of a
grand offensive movement into Canada had been given up, but he
was not willing to remain idle. Moving about 2500
men into the enemy's territory, he attacked gallantly.
Scott, who was selected to lead the advance with 1300
men, met, July 5, Riall with 1500 men and won a signal
victory at Chippewa. The Americans showed great efficiency in
marksmanship, and lost only 297, while their opponents lost 515.
Brown now united with Scott, and they met the main body of the
British three weeks later at Lundy's Lane. The action began in
the afternoon and lasted five hours, until darkness intervened. Every
part of the field was hotly contested, and the Americans gradually
pushed the British from their positions. When the fighting ceased
they had lost 853 out of 2000 engaged and the enemy had lost 879
out of 3000. So far as actual fighting went, Brown had the better
of it, but he considered it advisable to fall back when his opponent
received reinforcements. The movement into Canada was abandoned.
It had accomplished all that could be expected in showing that
American soldiers could win victories when properly led and trained.
While this campaign was being fought, Sir George Prevost, com-
manding in Canada, led a splendid army of 11,000 men along Bur-
goyne's old route, hoping to pass Lake Champlain and
create consternation on the Hudson. Such a campaign, McDon-
if successful, must have an important influence in New °ugh s Vic"
England, where an active group of leaders wished to have -1^™
those states join Canada in order to be rid of the Virginia Champlain.
predominancy. General Macomb, commanding at Platts-
burg, on Lake Champlain, had only 2000 men to meet this invasion,
and Prevost felt that he could easily dispose of them. On the lake
were two small fleets, the American commander being Captain Thomas
McDonough, a young man of thirty, who proved to have remarkable
capacity. The fighting strength of the British ships was double
that of the Americans. To succeed in his plans Prevost must destroy
McDonough, and the two squadrons joined in deadly combat on
September n, while the army before Plattsburg awaited the result.
The British expected the victory because their largest ship, a frigate
of thirty-seven guns, outclassed our strongest vessel. They concen-
trated their attack on the Saratoga, McDonough's largest ship.
After two hours' fighting it was disabled, when the commander, by
a daring maneuver, turned it around so that a fresh broadside was
brought to bear, with the result that the British frigate struck her
colors in half an hour. By that time the whole British squadron
was defeated, and Prevost's army retreated to Canada. McDonough's
achievement occasioned an outburst of joy throughout the country,
and, like Perry's victory on Lake Erie, it rendered safe an important
part of the frontier.
326 THE WAR OF 1812
For the blundering in this important part of the theater of war
the Virginia regime was chiefly responsible. Jefferson's non-resistance
policy was more creditable to his heart than to his head.
Why the jjjs predecessors filled army and navy with federalist
W^k.W8 officers and showered contempt upon republicans who
might have been appointed. He repaid their scorn with
interest, and in army appointments he ignored the federalists and
collected as weak a group of incompetents as could be found in any
service. Their selection can only be explained on the theory that
he believed they would never have anything of importance to do.
That the navy did not undergo the same deterioration was due to
the fact that its officers were taken from the maritime class, mostly
federalists in sympathy, and to the effect of the Tripolitan war in
keeping alive the best traditions of the navy. With regard to the army
Madison continued the same course as Jefferson. Eustis, secretary
of war from March 7, 1809, to December 31, 1812, was a shiftless
politician who knew not how to choose the generals or to plan a cam-
paign. His successor, Armstrong, more active than Eustis, muddled
things by holding to his friend, the incompetent Wilkinson, and by
going to the field himself, where he produced confusion by interfering
with plans of better men, until at last, overwhelmed by the loss of the
capital, he was forced out of office August 30, 1814. He was succeeded
by Monroe, a more practical administrator though not an ideal secre-
tary, who outlasted the war. Hamilton, secretary of the navy from
March 7, 1809, to January 13, 1813, was as weak as Eustis and did
little to strengthen his department. His successor in office until
December i, 1814, was more active and strengthened the navy by
constructing small ships of war to operate against the enemy's com-
merce. Thus in these two important departments defeat and disaster
taught wisdom as truly as in the command of the armies. It required
much sad experience to teach the nation the necessity of training
in order to conduct such an important affair as a great national
struggle.
OPERATIONS AT SEA
The war party did not despise the navy, as their project to build
seventy-fours and frigates shows; but they could not overcome
the prejudices of the regular republicans. In 1807,
>tate of when Barron's failure to fight the Leopard caused great
inel8l2^y disgust among those who opposed a navy on principle, it
was decided to discharge the crews of the leading frigates
and to raise the number of gunboats to 257. Congress indorsed the
policy. Jefferson preferred gunboats because they confined the
navy to harbor defense and were cheap. The federalists jeered at
his idea that small craft armed with light guns could keep the enemy's
ships out of our ports, and the experience of war showed they were
SUCCESSFUL NAVAL ACTIONS 327
right. The war party in 1812 had come to realize this, and failing
to get the new ships they wished they put the vessels we had in a
proper state of service. Eight ships, four of them forty-fours, with an
equal number of smaller vessels, was the strength of the navy. Most
people thought that to send them against the mistress of the sea was
but to throw them away; but many inward-bound merchant ships
were on the ocean in need of protection. Five ships, commanded by
Rodgers and Decatur, were in New York harbor when the official
information of the declaration of war reached that place, and in an
hour they were at sea searching for a British convoy known to be on
the ocean. They sailed boldly across the Atlantic to the English
coast, thence to the Madeiras, and then to Boston without adventure.
The day before Rodgers arrived in Boston came, also, the Constitu-
tion, Captain Isaac Hull, nephew of the commander at Detroit,
with thrilling news of victory. August 19 she met and
defeated the British ship Guerrtere, 38 guns, after a fight
of half an hour. The disabled ship could not be taken
into port, and was fired and abandoned. She had been
very active in impressments, and her destruction occasioned joy
from one end of the coast to the other. Then followed a series of
naval duels in which the Americans bore themselves with distinction.
In October the Wasp captured the Frolic and started with her for
an American port, but both ships were later taken by a larger enemy
vessel. Shortly afterwards the United States took the Macedonian
and carried her safely into Newport, while in December the Constitution
defeated and burned the Java, 38 guns. February 24 the Hornet
sunk the Peacock after an action of fifteen minutes. In all these
affairs the American ship, except the Wasp, was stronger than her
opponent ; but the accurate fire and good seamanship of the Americans
astonished the enemy and brought them to realize that their best
efforts were demanded on this side the Atlantic. In America,
also, the effect was marked. A wave of enthusiasm for the navy
swept the country, and congress voted to build sixteen new ships
of war.
June i, 1813, came a disaster which sadly checked the American
ardor. Captain Lawrence, who commanded the Hornet against
the Peacock, was now in charge of the Chesapeake, fitting in Boston,
with orders to cruise off the mouth of the St. Lawrence
in order to intercept supplies for the British in Canada.
Blockading the harbor was the Shannon, Captain Broke, peake.
with some smaller ships. He was anxious for a combat
with the Chesapeake, sent in a challenge, and ordered his companion
ship away so as to induce Lawrence to come out. The latter needed
little urging. He was rashly brave, and the recent victories had made
him overconfident. He had been in command only ten days, his
best officers were ill and absent, and his crew were raw and sullen.
328 THE WAR OF 1812
The ships were nearly of equal size, but the Shannon was manned by
a well-drilled crew who adored their commander. Lawrence had not
received the Briton's challenge when he learned that only a frigate
kept the blockade. He was not averse to action, and the opportunity
to get to sea seemed too good to miss ; so he boldly sailed out, and
at six o'clock the action began at the outer edge of Massachusetts Bay.
In sixteen minutes Lawrence was mortally wounded, and his ship
had surrendered after a brave battle. The Chesapeake was carried
to Halifax, where the body of her commander was given honorable
burial by the victors. The remains were later reinterred in New
York. Lawrence's utterance as he was carried below, "Don't give
up the ship," was repeated far and wide, and the people forgot his
rashness in admiration of his courage.
The repeal of the Orders in Council by England led her to hope
that the war might be avoided, but she would not give up impress-
ments, and the hope of adjustment vanished. It thus
^al ! happened that it was not until the spring of 1813 that
Checked. sne gave ner Dest strength to the task before her. At this
time the blockade was made stringent, commercial ships
were vigorously seized, and a strong naval force continued off the
coast. Decatur, with the United States and Macedonian, trying
to get to sea by way of Long Island Sound, was forced into New
London harbor and bottled up for the rest of the war. In the spring
of 1814 he was transferred to the President, blockaded at New York.
It was not until the following January that he was able to get out
in a storm, the blockaders pursuing and forcing him to an unequal
fight, in which he surrendered. Similar fates awaited most of the other
ships in the navy. The Adams was burned in the Penobscot, 1814,
to prevent capture by the enemy; the Argus was defeated by the
Pelican off the coast of Wales in 1813 ; the Enterprise, the newly
built Frolic, and the Essex were all taken before the close of the war.
The Constellation and the Congress were also securely blockaded in
American harbors. At the beginning of the war we had
Growth of ten effective ships and seven smaller vessels ranked as
18*^' * ~ brigs. So fast had the navy grown, spite of losses, that
at the close of 1815 it contained seventeen ships, three
of them new seventy-fours, nine brigs, thirteen schooners, and three
sloops.
War was hardly declared before American privateers were on the
seas. Subscription lists posted at the merchants' coffeehouses
Am ri invited all adventurous persons to share the expense and
Privateers. Pront sure to come through despoiling Great Britain's
rich maritime trade. In Massachusetts, New York,
and Maryland the response was particularly generous. Three-fourths
of the 492 licensed privateers were from these three states. Good
sailing and the ability to get out of tight places were necessary qualities
WASHINGTON CAPTURED
329
of a good privateer. Some of the captains displayed great boldness,
attacking British privateers, and even small naval ships, with success.
Half of the ships engaged in the field did not come up to these require-
ments and took no prizes, but those best fitted for the enterprise
paid their owners handsome profits, while they enriched our naval
history with some of its most thrilling exploits. In the war of 1812,
1344 prizes were thus taken from Great Britain, the last in which
the United States have resorted to privateering.
THE BRITISH CAMPAIGN ON CHESAPEAKE BAY
In the summer of 1814, as Prevost prepared his invasion of New
York by Lake Champlain, a British fleet under Admiral Cochrane
and a army of 4000 men under Major General Ross
appeared in the Chesapeake to create a diversion for the ?bjlct of
benefit of the northern operations. The plan was to pedition.
take the capital and to seize Baltimore, especially disliked
for its part in privateering. Ross landed without opposition at
Benedict, on the Patuxent, forty miles from Washington, and marched
unopposed on the city. News of his movement had reached the
president seven weeks earlier,
and the militia were frantically
called out. They came to-
gether slowly, commanded by
General Winder, a man of lit-
tle determination. Fall-
ing back before the advancing
foe, he at last faced them at
Bladensburg, five miles from the
capital. His position was good,
a hill commanding a bridge
across the Patuxent, and he had
sufficient artillery. His forces
were between six and seven
thousand, all raw militia ex-
cept five hundred marines and
sailors under Captain Barney,
of the navy. They were just
assembled, did not know their
officers, and Winder had no in-
fluence over them. As the
British approached the bridge
they received the American
artillery fire, but dashed across,
formed, and advanced on the Americans. The militia delivered one
or two fires, and fled pell-mell. Barney's men stood their ground,
b&lL 2J3W
330 THE WAR OF 1812
firing with steadiness until about to be surrounded, when they
fled from a field on which they now had no support. The British
Washi on the evening of the same day, August 24, entered
Takenng Washington, from which president, officials, and many
residents had fled. The capitol, president's house, and
the executive offices were burned by the troops. Ross justified
this piece of vandalism as retaliation for the destruction of the parlia-
ment building at Toronto in the preceding year. The
Buildings Americans did not pretend to justify the outrages at
Burned. Toronto, but asserted that it was the action of pri-
vates, whereas the torch was applied in Washington at
the direction of the commanding general. As an act of retaliation
Ross's course went far beyond the action alleged as its justification,
and it was committed with such evident relish by him and his officers
that it cannot be defended as soldierly conduct.
While Ross moved against Washington seven small vessels appeared
before Alexandria, levied a contribution, and rejoined the main force
as Ross, his work at Washington done, embarked his
Attacked? force anc* move(i on Baltimore. September n he landed
at North Point, twelve miles from the city, against which
he advanced on a narrow neck of land between the Patapsco and an
arm of the bay, saying he would winter in the city even if "it rained
militia." Next morning he was mortally wounded in a skirmish,
but his army continued to advance. The people of the city and state
had collected to the number of 14,000, and earthworks were constructed
to protect the place. The harbor was impeded by sunken hulks and
defended by Fort McHenry, well garrisoned by regulars and sailors.
While the army approached by land the navy under command of
Admiral Cochrane began to shell the fort. After several hours' bom-
bardment the admiral reported that he could not advance; and
although the infantry had carried the American first line, they did
not feel like charging the works before them, and it was decided to
withdraw to the ships. The expedition dropped down the bay,
and a month later sailed out the capes to take part in the expedition
against Louisiana.
The attack on Washington showed as clearly as the
of Militia? operations in Canada the weakness of untrained militia.
It is still more evident that the disaster was due chiefly
to the lack of intelligent general officers. But the campaign about to
be conducted around New Orleans revealed the value of militia when
well trained and well led. The destruction of the cap-
*ta^ aroused great indignation against the administration,
strong. and Armstrong, secretary of war, resigned. He was chiefly
responsible for the inertness in his department, although
Madison and congress, it 'must be admitted, had given him slender
resources. Armstrong was succeeded by Monroe, who for nearly a
year was head of the state and war departments.
LOOKING TOWARD FLORIDA 331
Meanwhile, British troops had landed at various harbors in Massa-
chusetts and Connecticut, burning such crafts as they found. A
more serious demonstration was an expedition against
the eastern coast of Maine. The country as far as the JJJJjjJ8^
Penobscot was seized after little resistance by the natives, Elsewhere,
with the intention of holding it after peace was made,
in order to establish a safe route from Montreal to Halifax. When
it was given up in 1815, the inhabitants, it was said, regretted that
they did not continue under British sway.
THE WAR ON THE GULF COAST
It will be remembered that the war party hoped for an opportunity
to acquire Florida. Spain was England's ally, her South and Central
American colonies were revolting one after the other,
at home she was struggling for existence against Napoleon:
what better opportunity could there be, thought the
expansionists, to oust her from the part of the coast which destiny
evidently meant us to occupy ? Madison accepted the idea, and would
have carried it out by invading Florida without other pretext than
the Louisiana treaty, had not the senate restrained him. Spite of
this, two important events happened on the Florida border, one of
them resulting in increase of American territory.
In 1 8 10 the inhabitants of the part of West Florida nearest the
Mississippi revolted against Spain, proclaimed themselves a state,
seized the post at Baton Rouge, and asked for annexation
to the United States. Madison by proclamation ordered J?a
the governor of the territory of Lousiana to extend Acquired,
authority over this district without coming into conflict
with any Spanish post. He asserted our right to West Florida by
the Louisiana treaty and proposed to hold the region in question
subject to future agreement with Spain. Thus our authority was
extended to the Pearl river, beyond which was Mobile in undisturbed
Spanish possession.
The revolt of the Spanish colonies in South America was suggestive,
and a plan was made for a similar movement in East Florida. When
it was accomplished, the United States, it seems, was to
step in and annex the territory, as at Baton Rouge. In
1811 congress in a secret act authorized the president
to take possession of Florida under certain conditions, and Madison
appointed two commissioners who repaired to the Georgia frontier.
Amelia Island, just within the Florida line, was the scene of much
smuggling, which it was desirable to break up. Here occurred a
weak attempt at a revolution, and .American soldiers occupied the
island, but the revolt had so little support from the inhabitants that
Madison did not dare carry out the plans made for him. Amelia
Island was held, however, until 1813.
332 THE WAR OF 1812
In the autumn of 1812 Madison called out 2070 west Tennessee
militia under Andrew Jackson, to march to Natchez, expecting to
use them against Florida. This was merely an execu-
Seizure of tive act, and when congress refused to sanction the pro-
Baikedby Pose(^ expedition Jackson was recalled to Nashville.
Congress, The west Tennessee militia were eager for war, and had
1813. confidence in their leader. Their opportunity came late
in 1813, when it was decided to send them as one of three
expeditions against the Creek Indians, who were on the warpath in
sympathy with the Indians of the Northwest. The Tennesseans were
to march into the Creek country from the north, the Georgia militia
from the east, and an expedition from New Orleans was to approach
through Mobile Bay and the Alabama river.
The most difficult task was Jackson's, but it alone was successful.
When the winter closed in he had reached the upper Coosa, after
winning two victories over his adversaries. Four days
Subdue?. S °f marcning and one good victory would have given
him complete success, but he could not get supplies, and
his men mutinied and were sent home. With only a handful of
followers he held what he had gained until new troops were raised, and
March 27 completed the subjugation of the Creeks in the victory
of Horse Shoe Bend, or Tohopeka. His campaign showed that he
had remarkable power of command as well as resourcefulness and
energy. In consequence he was made a major general and assigned
to the command of the seventh military district. Besides
Seized Louisiana, the district included Mobile, which had been
annexed without resistance in April, 1813. Now, as
in regard to Baton Rouge, Madison acted under his interpretation
of the Louisiana treaty.
Jackson's first act in his new capacity was to make the treaty of
Fort Jackson, August 9, by which the Creeks gave up their lands in
southern and western Alabama. He thus opened a
ofhForteaty vast re&i°n to white settlement, and made safe the Coosa-
Jackson. Alabama line of communication. Next he turned to
Mobile. The advance guard of the great expedition
against New Orleans had arrived at Pensacola; Jackson seized the
town regardless of neutrality obligations, and the British sailed away.
He was hardly back in Mobile when he learned that
Occupied* New Orleans was threatened by a body of more than
10,000 troops. He hastened to the city, which was
nearly undefended, calling the militia from Tennessee, Kentucky,
and Georgia as he went. Had Winder, in the preceding summer,
shown half Jackson's energy, Ross would not have reached Wash-
ington.
December 10, the British fleet anchored in Lake Borgne, and
early on the 23d a division of the army was landed eight miles below
THE EIGHTH OF JANUARY, 1815 333
the city on a strip of land less than a mile wide, between the river
and the swamp. Instantly Jackson was in motion, delivering in
the evening and early night a sharp battle which drove
the enemy to take refuge under the levee until reenforce- Arrival of
ments came up from the ships. Then Jackson fell back ^1^**
and began to construct breastworks. Pakenham, the Orleans.
British commander, was cautious, and would not move until
all his forces were landed, including the artillery. He thus allowed
Jackson time to construct formidable defenses, which the royal
artillery could not destroy. On January 8, 1815, he threw away
his caution and attempted to carry these works. He and his whole
army held American militia in contempt, and thought
they would break when charged vigorously by British ^*^le of
regulars. In the early dawn two red-coated columns Orleans,
rushed on Jackson's lines, one near the river and one
near the swamp. They met a withering rifle-fire from which the
bravest soldiers must have recoiled. Twice they were rallied and led
forward by their best officers, and each time repulsed with great
slaughter. Pakenham and General Gibbs were killed, and General
Keene severely wounded. The loss in this part of the army was
1971 killed and wounded, and on Jackson's side 13. Meanwhile,
Colonel Thornton, with 600 regulars, crossed to the west bank of the
river to carry some batteries there, which bore on the ground over
which the British must attack on the east side. He met an insufficient
force of Louisiana ,and Kentucky militia, swept it aside, took the
batteries, and held the west bank at discretion. Fortunately for
the Americans, this movement was delayed until after the attack on
their intrenchments on the east bank was repulsed, and by that severe
blow the British were so crippled that they relinquished the campaign
and withdrew to their fleet.
The victory at New Orleans was one of the great events in American
history. It not only saved the mouth of the Mississippi from conquest
and restored to the people confidence in their ability to
win battles, but it gave the Western people, who had ^fig^fcance
won it without much help from the seaboard, the con- victory,
fidence to assert a greater influence in national affairs.
To these people, and to many others in all parts of the country, Jackson
became the greatest living American. He had, besides his military
qualities, political courage and integrity, which sustained him in
a long and important career. He was unschooled in the arts of war
and statesmanship, but in each field his remarkable natural sense
made him essentially efficient. No American has left a stronger
mark on our political history.
Before Jackson's victory was won, peace was made between England
and the United States. The Russian Czar, from 1812 an ally of
'England, sought to end the war, and believed it might be done since
334 THE WAR OF 1812
the Orders in Council were repealed. He offered each party his
services as mediator. Madison accepted, and in the spring of 1813,
Bayard, of Delaware, and Gallatin, set out for St. Peters-
burg to join John Quincy Adams, our minister there, in
Begun°n a Peace commission. The action was hasty; for Eng-
land had not accepted the mediation. She told the Czar
that the question between her and the United States did not admit
of mediation. But she did not wish to offend her powerful ally, and
expressed a willingness to treat directly with the American commis-
sioners. Such a course would give her a freer hand in the negotiation.
After some delay the British ministry repeated the offer to Madison,
and congress, accepting it for what it was worth, sent Clay and
Jonathan Russell as additional commissioners of peace. England
appointed three men of little prominence, Lord Gambier, Henry
Goulburn, and Dr. Adams. The Americans took it as a slight that
more capable men were not named, but the ministry expected to
keep the negotiations well in hand. The commissioners began their
labors at Ghent early in August, 1814.
The Americans asked that impressments and the right of search
be relinquished. The British replied with such demands that it
seemed they did not desire peace. We were asked, for
one tnm&> to accept an Indian buffer state on our north-
west as an offset to our attack on Canada. The war
against Napoleon was then believed to be ended, the English people
were elated, they had not heard of the better fighting of the Americans
on the northern frontier in the third year of the war, and the result
was stout demands on their part. The American commissioners
reported the demands to Madison, who made them public. An out-
burst of indignation ensued in nearly every part of the United States.
Lord Castlereagh, the prime minister, seeing that the war would go
on with more energy than before, concluded to modify his terms.
England was exhausted by the long war on the continent and needed
peace more than she needed to triumph over America. Castlereagh
had begun to see that the continental nations would be secretly against
England in adjusting the affairs of Europe, and he did not wish at
that time to be embarrassed by a transatlantic war. So it happened
that as the American commissioners were about to go home the British
abandoned the worst of their conditions. From day to day they
gave up still more, with the result that finally a treaty was signed,
December 24, in which neither side gained or lost. It provided
for the cessation of arms, the restoration of conquests,
S'TrCd*D anc^ a commissi°n to settle the long-disputed Canadian
24^1814. e° boundary. The matters for which we went to war were
not mentioned ; but as England was to reduce her navy
with the coming of peace, the question of impressment was no longer
important. February 15, 1815, the treaty was unanimously approved
NEW ENGLAND IGNORED 335
by the senate. For the first time since the constitution was adopted
the United States faced the future without anxiety about their foreign
relations.
NEW ENGLAND DISCONTENT
New England generally chafed under Southern control. Non-
importation, embargo, and non-intercourse affected her business
prosperity more than the South's. Moreover, it seemed
likely that she, a trading community, would continue to be Isolation of
outclassed by the agricultural section. Every new merciaT"
state admitted to the union added to the strength of states,
the rural classes. New York itself, once fair fighting
ground for the commercial class, was becoming a farmer's state
through the settlement of her rich western lands. What hope was
there that commercial New England should get justice from this
powerful aggregation directed by the authors of the existing policies ?
Probably the majority of New Englanders were not concerned with
this question, but it rankled in the breasts of the federalists. Their
only hope of return to power was in the defeat of the republicans,
which seemed impossible, or in separation from the union. In 1803-
1804 Pickering and his friends planned for separation with the support
of New York, but they failed through the opposition of Hamilton
(see page 300). When war against England threatened,
they took up the plan again, this time hoping to join plans of
New England with Canada under British protection, ^^~
thus making a great state in which the New England states Federalists,
would have good opportunity for commercial and political
expansion. Not all New Englanders favored this plan, but the radical
federalists cherished it and hoped to utilize the popular discontent
to carry it through.
Their attitude was known in England. Did not Pickering keep
his friend Rose, minister for the early months of 1808, well informed?
And did not Jackson revel in federalist flattery from
Baltimore to Boston? In 1809 came John Henry to Efforts to
Boston, an agent of the governor of Canada, seeking contentTnto
to learn just what could be expected in that quarter. Disunion.
His letters were discreet, but they reveal great dissatis-
faction on the part of the leading federalists there. In 1812 Foster,
the English minister in Washington, was in close cooperation with
the federalists, they urging that England should not yield to the admin-
istration. If war came, said they, it would be short and disastrous
to America, and the administration would be overthrown. And
when war was declared, 34 federalists in the house, 19 of them from
New England, issued an address declaring the war unjustifiable and
defending England's attitude. All this was well considered in London,
and as a token of appreciation the ministry in establishing the com-
336 THE WAR OF 1812
mercial blockade exempted the New England ports north of New
London. When Madison called on the states for quotas of militia
in 1812, Massachusetts and Connecticut refused to raise troops to
serve out of the state, but took steps to equip their forces for state
defense. There was much unemployed money in the New England
banks ; probably half the specie in the country was in New England.
Yet the war bonds of the government could hardly be sold there,
less than $3,000,000 being disposed of, while the Middle states took
nearly $35,000,000. With this opposition the president could not
deal. He was forced to conduct the war without much aid from the
states east of the Hudson.
Early in the war the federalists in Essex county, Massachusetts,
issued an address written by Senator Pickering for a convention
to consider the situation within the state. There was
Convention muc^ ammated discussion in other parts of the state,
Called!1 1 but a number of conservative federalists in Boston, led
by Dexter, secretary of war under Adams, checked the
movement in that city, and the other towns hesitated also. The
movement was revived in the autumn of 1814, when Washington
was in ashes and part of Maine, then under Massachusetts authority,
was occupied by the British. Governor Strong, much opposed to the
war, now called out the militia to repel the invader. He placed it
under state officers and asked the secretary of war if the expenses
would be paid by the national government. He was told that the
secretary had no authority to pay troops not in national service.
Then the extremists declared that the state was abandoned in time
of need, that the taxes she paid generously were not used for her defense,
and that she must look out for her own interests. The governor
called a meeting of the legislature, in which the program of the ex-
tremists was adopted by 250 to 76 votes in both houses. The majority
chose twelve delegates to a convention at Hartford, December 15,
to consider the condition of the country. Connecticut approved
the movement and appointed seven delegates, while Rhode Island
appointed four. The lower house in New Hampshire's legislature
approved, but the council was republican and no delegates were named.
Nor were any sent from Vermont. It was a rural state and had no
sea-going commerce, and it was not so badly alienated.
While these things occurred, came the congressional elections
of 1814. In New England the federalists gained nine seats, and of
the whole forty-one the republicans had only two. But in the entire
country the federalist representation shrank from 68 to 65. Thus
while the war party gained 12 places outside of New England, it lost
within that region. The explanation is that the calamities of 1814
were uniting the people of the Middle and Southern states, and it
seems that but for the efforts of the extremists the same results would
have occurred in the Northeast.
THE HARTFORD CONVENTION 337
Senator Pickering, in Washington, observed the meeting of the
Hartford convention with delight. He had his following in it,
mostly young men, who wished immediate steps taken
toward separation. But another spirit prevailed. A ^
group of more conservative men gained the ascendancy session.10
and made George Cabot, a timid man, president. Two
delegates appointed by popular meetings in New Hampshire and one
chosen by the town of Windham, Vermont, presented themselves
and were given seats, making the membership 26. The meetings
were secret, and continued until January 5, when an adjournment
was ordered to meet in Boston at the call of the president. An address
was published in justification of its conduct, filled with ideas taken
from Madison's Virginia Resolutions (see page 285), and upholding
the opinion that a state should conduct her defense when invaded.
Seven suggested amendments to the national constitution were also
announced, which, with the report, were submitted to the states
represented in the convention. From the people at large and from
the legislature they met a warm approval; and Massachusetts and
Connecticut sent delegates to lay the demands of New England before
the national government. Just at this stage, when disunion seemed
inevitable, came news of the treaty signed at Ghent, December 24,
and the whole movement collapsed.
Contemporaries freely charged the Hartford convention with
promoting disunion, and sometimes it was pronounced traitorous.
One of the members, Harrison Gray Otis, to vindicate
himself in after years, published the journal of the con- Significance
vention. But it was a mere skeleton of the proceeding, England
and contained no speeches or other matter to show what Discontent,
the delegates really intended. Theodore Dwight, secre-
tary of the convention, published a history of the convention, but it
was in the tone of an advocate, and has not been received as a frank
statement. The amendments proposed by the convention demanded
concessions which congress and the nation must have denied. They
asked for a relinquishment of the compromise of the constitution by
which three-fifths of the slaves were counted in representation and
in the apportionment of direct taxes, for a two-thirds vote to admit
a new state to the union, for a like vote to declare war, or to establish
commercial non-intercourse, for the prohibition of officeholding
to naturalized citizens, for the ineligibility of a president for two
terms, and for the denial of the authority to lay an embargo
longer than sixty days. The men who announced this program were
experienced political leaders. They must have had some policy in
reserve to be adopted if their demands were refused. They doubtless
knew they had aroused a great popular impulse which could hardly
be turned backward. It is difficult to believe they expected the
national government to yield, and failing that, it seems very probable
338 THE WAR OF 1812
that they meant to carry the movement they had so carefully and
ably developed to its logical conclusion, some sort of disunion.
On the other hand, it must be remembered that the union in 1814
was not so sacred a thing as later. Recently entered into on the
ground that it was best for the states to act together, it was to most
men still a thing of political expediency. The New Englanders were
in a position to ask what it was worth to their section. The extreme
federalists repudiated the republican doctrines, rejected government by
all the people, and Puritan as they were, felt an aversion to a govern-
ment controlled by men openly charged with skepticism. They
thought, also, about their commercial interests and about the possi-
bility of being overwhelmed by new states. From their standpoint
it was not unnatural to ask if the union was an advantage to New
England. These thoughts were strongest in the minds of the extreme
federalists. To them the collapse of their plans with the end of the
war must have been a disappointment. But to the mass of New
Englanders, moderate federalists as well as republicans, the passing
of the crisis was probably a relief. They quickly regained their con-
fidence in the union, and New England discontent immediately dis-
appeared. The federalist party, from its apparent sympathy with the
Hartford convention, received a blow from which it did not recover.
One test of the efficiency of a state is its ability to meet a great
crisis; for example, its ability to wage war. In this sense the war
of 1812 gives us an opportunity to see how far we had
of the War11 come m the road of political self-direction since we became
an independent power. Badly as the struggle was fought
out, it was carried on more successfully than the revolution. Until
it began we had not seriously determined whether or not we could
make war. We had no army, and a weak navy. We had no corps
of trained officers to marshal the citizen soldiers. We had no
machinery of credit to enable the government to place its emergency
loans, and the sense of nationality was not developed to enable the
government to draw the support it ought to have from all sections.
The calamities of the first two years of war showed every man these
weaknesses, and the lesson was well learned. When war ended, the
people were aroused, they had acquired a good military organization,
they were determined to have an adequate navy, they had come to
see the need of common effort, they were ready for a better financial
system, and they were fighting their battles better than before.
When the struggle was over, the whole system of inefficiency was a
thing of the past. From that time to the present the nation has
never gone back to the old state of unpreparedness, the army has
been better organized, the navy has been respectable, and the na-
tional resources have been held in hand with a reasonable sense of
national needs. The war of 1812 was worth all it cost in national
humiliation ; for it taught the American people to take seriously its
function of national defense.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 339
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The general works on the period treated in this chapter are the books by Adams,
McMaster, Schouler, Hildreth, and Wilson (see page 312), and Babcock, Rise of
American Nationality (1906). Adams's treatment (vols. VI-IX) is the fullest, the
best presented, and most scholarly, and it contains many extracts from original
documents. Most histories of this period show too much sense of humiliation
at the conduct of the war. It is perhaps a federalist survival. The war was badly
conducted, and the people of the time were chagrined at its failures, but the his-
torian may well suppress his feelings in order to unfold the patent causes of the
failure. The only considerable work in this better spirit is Mahan, Sea Power in its
Relations to the War of 1812, 2 vols. (1905).
The sources, legislative, diplomatic, executive, administrative, and others,
are the same as for the preceding chapters (see page 312). Niles, Weekly Register,
76 vols. (1811-1849), begins to be valuable for this period. See also, Hart, Ameri-
can History told by Contemporaries, vol. Ill, chap. XIX (1906), and MacDonald,
Select Documents (1898).
On the British side see Martineau, History of England, 4 vols. (American
edition, 1864). Volume I deals with the years 1800-1815. The treatment is un-
satisfactory, but an adequate history of England for this period remains to be
written. Broderick and Fotheringham, The Political History of England (Hunt
and Poole, editors), vol. XI (1906), treats the period in a condensed and dry
manner, six pages being given to the war with the United States. Valuable docu-
ments are in Castlereagh, Correspondence, vols. VIII-X (1851-1853). See also
the two English series, Parliamentary Debates (Cobbett) and Parliamentary Papers,
and The Annual Register, 1810-1815. The best Canadian works are: Kingsford,
History of Canada, 10 vols. (1887-1898), not always reliable for details; and
Withrow, Popular History of the Dominion of Canada (1899).
Besides the biographies and writings of leading men cited on previous pages
(see pages 275, 312) the following are useful: Schurz, Life of Henry Clay, 2 vols.
(1887) ; Morse, Life of John Quincy Adams (1882) ; C. F. Adams, editor, Memoirs
of John Quincy Adams, 12 vols. (1874-1877); Writings of John Quincy Adams
(Ford, ed., 1913-) ; and Kennedy, Memoir of the Life of William Wirt, 2 vols. (ed.
1860).
Military Operations. On the American side the documents will be found in
abundance in the American State Papers, Military A/airs, vol. I, and Naval A/airs,
vol. I. Adams, History of the United States, vols. VI-IX, contains the best American
account. It contains valuable extracts from reports. See also : C. J. Ingersoll,
Second War between the United States and Great Britain, 4 vols. in two series (1845-
1849, 1852), strongly republican; Lossing, Pictorial Field-Book of the War of 1812
(1868), not always accurate in details; Brackenridge, History of the Late War be-
tween the United States and Great Britain (1817 and many later editions), a straight-
forward narrative ; Johnson, History of the War of 1812-1815 (1882) , clear and read-
able ; and Soley, Wars of the United States, in Winsor, Narrative and Critical History,
vol. VII, contains good bibliography. The following special works are also use-
ful: McAfee, History of the Late War in the Western Country (1816) ; Dawson,
Civil and Military Services of Major General William Henry Harrison (1824) ; Cruik-
shank, Documentary History of the Campaigns upon the Niagara Frontier (1896-1904) ;
Latour, Historical Memoir of the War in West Florida and Louisiana in 1814- '815
(English translation, 1816); Bassett, Life of Andrew Jackson, 2 vols. (1911); and
Parton, Life of Andrew Jackson, 3 vols. 1860.
British Operations. Treated in James, Military Occurrences of the Late War,
2 vols. (1818), — worth reading, though questioned by American writers; Gleig,
Campaigns of the British Army at Washington, Baltimore, and New Orleans (1821), a
good account; Richardson, War of 1812 (1842, rev. ed. 1902), deals with the Ca-
nadian campaigns; and Tupper, Life and Correspondence of Major General Sir
340 THE WAR OF 1812
Isaac Brock (rev. ed. 1847). For contemporary notice see The Annual Register,
1812-1815.
Naval Affairs. The leading American books are : Mahan, Sea Power in Its
Relations to the War of 1812, 2 vols. (1905), very judicious; Maclay, History of the
United States Navy, 2 vols. (new ed. 1901-1902), readable and generally trust-
worthy; Maclay, History of American Privateers (1899) ; Coggeshall, History of the
American Privateers and Letters of Marque during our War with England (1856).
The British accounts are often at variance with the American accounts. See
James, Naval History of Great Britain, vols. IV-VI (1886), Ibid., The Chief Naval
Occurrences of the Late War (1817) ; and Williams, The Liverpool Privateers (1897).
On the Treaty of Ghent the documents are to be found in American State Papers,
Foreign, vol. Ill; Gallatin, Writings, and Adams's Memoirs contain valuable in-
formation about the negotiations. See also J. Q. Adams, The Duplicate Letters,
the Fisheries, and the Mississippi (1822), and Ibid., Writings, W. C. Ford, ed.
(1913-). Hijdt, Early Diplomatic Negotiations of the United States with Russia
(Johns Hopkins, Studies, 1906) has an account of the Russian offer of mediation.
New England Discontent. Adams is the best general authority. Other works
are: Adams, Documents Relating to New England Federalism, 1800-1815 (1878);
Dwight, History of the Hartford Convention (1833) ; Carey, The Olive Branch, or
Faults on Both Sides (1814, many times reprinted) ; and Goodrich, Recollections
of a Life-time, 2 vols. (1851), contains incidents relating to the Convention.
For Independent Reading
Maclay, A History of American Privateers (1899) ; Hollis, The Frigate Con-
stitution (1900); Goodrich, Recollections of a Lifetime, 2 vols. (1851); Dwight,
Travels in New England and New York (1821-1822); Stone, Life and Times of
Sa-go-ye-wa-ha, or Red Jacket (1841) ; Brighton, Admiral Sir P. V. Broke (1866);
and Memoirs and Letters of Dolly Madison (1886).
CHAPTER XVI
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
GROWTH OF THE WEST AND SOUTHWEST
THE vastness of the natural resources of the continent impressed
the colonists from the earliest days, and the success of the revolution
strengthened this confidence. Masters of their own future, the men
of 1783 eagerly looked forward to an era of rapid empire-building.
In imagination they saw the interior of the continent settled by many
people and divided into rich and happy states. Already the tide
of settlement had passed into Kentucky and Tennessee and was
beginning to penetrate the region north of the Ohio and south of Lake
Erie. Further south a similar movement was. rolling back the forests
of western Georgia.
A glance at the early census returns shows how well the hopes of
the men of 1 783 were realized. In 1 790 the West, exclusive of Georgia,
had a population of 109,368, in 1815 the same territory
contained about 1,600,000 inhabitants ; and in these were „?!
111 • • * i -vi Migration,
not included a very numerous migration from the East
to western New York. This progress was achieved at the expense of
the older states, which increased in the same period from 3,819,846
to about 6,800,000 inhabitants. As all Europe was then at war, emi-
gration to America was inconsiderable, and the rapid gain in Western
population came chiefly from the older states. The South con-
tributed its share to Tennessee and Kentucky, and to the region imme-
diately north of the Ohio. New England was not well adapted to
agriculture, and stories of the opportunity in the West carried away
a constant stream of humanity from her farms and villages. New
England saw their departure with chagrin. The census reports indi-
cate how disastrous it was for her. The population of Connecticut,
237,946 in 1790, was only 275,248 in 1820, and the population of Mas-
sachusetts, exclusive of Maine, grew from 378,787 to 523,287 within
the same period. Albany was the immediate objective
of those who migrated, thence they traversed the Mohawk
valley to the rich Genesee lands beyond it, and on to the
lake, which was reached at Buffalo about 1800. In all western New
York were fertile lands to which the incomers were diverted. They
soon passed beyond the state's borders, following the shore of the lake
into northern Ohio, and thence into the much greater forest still farther
342 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
west. While many New Englanders settled in the West by other
routes, this direct road from Albany to Buffalo, a highway for canal
and railroad traffic in our own day, was the route by which most of
the New England life went to its new home in the West. Since the
Southerners settled largely in the region just north of the
Two st*ata Ohio, it happened that for a long time there existed a clear
tion kuhe divergence of ideals between the northern and southern
West. parts of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. The advance into
Georgia was almost entirely Southern, the immigrants
being from Virginia and the Carolinas. They carried slaves with them,
and quickly established cotton plantations which became the basis
of vast wealth.
The sale of the public lands was closely connected with this progress.
As long as the settlers were concerned with the Western lands claimed
by New York, Connecticut, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia,
regulations by congress were of no importance; but be-
Pubiic*16 of yond these were the rich tracts on the Ohio, for whose
Lands. disposal a land policy had to be devised. From colonial
times a usual method of selling public lands was to grant
them to large companies or rich individuals who could afford to open
them to settlement and to import European purchasers, if necessary.
Such a course was less likely to draw off the population from the older
parts of the country; and for that reason it now commended itself
to the majority in congress. For this reason large tracts were sold in
1788 to the Ohio Scioto Companies, and Symmes, a private specula tor,
got another great grant in the same year. These projects were lo-
cated respectively on the Muskingum, the Scioto, and the Great
Miami, all more than a hundred miles beyond the point at which the
Ohio crosses the boundary between Pennsylvania and Ohio. The
land adjacent to that boundary was to be sold by the government to
the settlers directly.
This first plan adopted to sell the latter land, announced in 1785
and slightly modified in 1787, provided that the region between
Pennsylvania and the eastern corner of the Ohio Company's
s£e s0^" ^ands should be surveyed in townships six miles square,
tem. each containing thirty-six sections one mile square, or
640 acres. The smallest amount to be sold to one buyer
was to be a section, and sales were to be at auction at the seat of govern-
ment at not less than one dollar an acre. The sixteenth section of each
township was to be reserved for schools. In 1787 Ohio
was organized as a territory, with General St. Clair for
North* of governor. When Washington became president, the Ohio
the Ohio. Company had planted the settlement of Marietta, and
Symmes that of Cincinnati. The Scioto Company was
an inflated speculation, and was soon in a collapsed condition. Be-
tween the Scioto and the Little Miami in a large tract were the mili-
THE NATIONAL LAND POLICY 343
tary lands reserved by Virginia for her revolutionary soldiers. In
1790 nearly 4300 white inhabitants were in the Northwest Terri-
tory, 1300 of them in and around Cincinnati, 1000 at Marietta, and
2000 in the country of the Illinois, at Kaskaskia, and on the Wabash.
Six years later the population of the territory was placed at about 15,000.
The men of the West freely declared that this slow growth was due
to the illiberal policy of land sales. The remedy, they said, was to
make purchases easy to the actual settler. In 1796 they
got a small concession. Lands might now be sold in sec-
tions of 640 acres, at not less than $2 an acre, and land 1800.
offices were to be opened at Pittsburg and Cincinnati.
As sales did not increase, further relaxation was made in 1800 in a
law for which William Henry Harrison was chiefly responsible. Four
additional land offices were opened in Ohio, tracts as small as 320
acres might be bought, and four years' credit was allowed the purchaser.
The price remained $2 an acre. This law promoted immigration, as
was desired. In 1800 the population of Ohio was 45,365, in 1810 it
was 230,760, and in 1815 it was about 400,000.
Another result was a vast amount of land speculation, by small
owners as well as large, who bought on credit, hoping to sell at a profit
before the last payments were due. The suffering con-
nected with the war of 1812 caused a collapse of this spec-
ulation, and in 1820 a new law gave up the credit system
and provided that small holdings, not less than 80 acres, should be
sold for cash at not less than $1.25 an acre, which since that time has
been the minimum price at which the public land has Lawoflg2
been sold. Offering a small farm cheap for cash made it
possible for any man to acquire a homestead who could pay $100,
and it favored the rapid settlement of the West. Distribution was
made still easier by laws of 1830 and 1841 providing that poor persons
settled on land without title should have a preemptive right to their
holdings. The next and last step in easy distribution was the home-
stead act of 1862, for the gift of small farms to actual settlers. The
provisions mentioned refer to farming lands : since 1820 timber lands
have brought not less than $2.50, mining lands $5.00, and coal lands
$10.00 an acre. All these prices were minimums. Early in the cen-
tury auctions were continually held. As the lands were opened in
districts and the best offered first, they frequently brought more than
the minimum. This was particularly true of the cotton lands in Ala-
bama and Mississippi.
The Northwest Ordinance, 1787, created the Northwest Territory,
with governor, council, and judges appointed by congress.
When it had 5000 free male adult inhabitants a territorial
legislature was to be organized to make local regulations,
It was later to be divided into not less than three nor
more than five territories, and each, when it contained 60,000
344 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
inhabitants, might be admitted to the union as a state. Slavery, ex-
cept as punishment for crime, was not to exist in its limits. The
first congress under the constitution confirmed the ordinance and in
i7Qcnt was adopted for the territory south of the Ohio, with some modi-
fications, chief of which was that slavery was not forbidden in this
region. It is the basis of our territorial system.
In 1800 that part of the Northwest Territory west of a line from
the mouth of the Kentucky to Fort Recovery and thence north to
Indiana Canada was set aside as Indiana Territory. The eastern
Territory. Part retamed the old name, and in 1803 Ohio was admitted
to the union, congress agreeing to *turn over the school
lands, one thirty-sixth of the total area, and to pay 3 per cent of the
proceeds from land sales in the state to the construction of roads. In
Other I^°^ Michigan Territory was organized, and Illinois in
Territories. I^O9- These four states and territories, larger than all the
Atlantic states north of the Carolinas, had in 1820 a
population of 792,719, and were receiving an enormous tide of immi-
gration. Wisconsin became a territory in 1836. As the settlers ad-
vanced the Indians fell back. Defeated by Wayne in 1794 and dis-
couraged by the victory of Harrison at the Thames in 1813, they
did not resist the encroachments on their domains. In one treaty
after another they sold their possessions and retired westward.
South of the Ohio the unsettled region was on the Gulf. The com-
promise of 1798 (see page 301) was followed by the creation of Missis-
sippi Territory, between the Chattahoochee and the
ofttc'ouM Mississippi, bounded on the north by a line from the mouth
Region. °f tne Yazoo to the Chattahoochee. The lands north of
this territory were conceded to Georgia. In 1802 a second
and more extensive agreement was made, by which Georgia ceded to
the United States her lands beyond her present boundary, receiving
in return the narrow strip just south of Tennessee, $1,250,000 from the
proceeds of land sales, and the promise that the national government
would extinguish the Indian titles in Georgia "as early as the same
Can ^e Peaceably obtained on reasonable terms." All this
regi°n was now made Mississippi Territory, and congress
promised to admit it as a state when its population was
as much as 60,000. Within it were Creek, Chickasaw, and Choctaw
Indians, the first in what is now Alabama and western Georgia, the
second and third along the Mississippi. Settlement in the South
proceeded more slowly than in the North, probably because slavery
kept back the poorer whites. In the first and second decades under
the constitution Georgia absorbed most of the migration southward,
and after 1804 Louisiana received another portion of it. During these
decades the intervening region, occupied by Indians, was not reached
by settlers. Jackson's victory over the Creeks, 1814, and the treaty
which followed, cut a wide zone out of the heart of the Indian country,
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT 345
approximately three-fourths of the later state of Alabama, and opened
it to settlement. The land was very fertile, and sold at auction at
high prices on credit. A few years later the price of cotton
fell, and there was much suffering among the incautious ^aba™a
speculators. But the movement brought in a large settlement,
number of settlers, and in 1816 Alabama Territory was cut
off from Mississippi. The settlement of this region increased the demand
for slaves, prices rose, and spite of the law of 1807 against importations
a great deal of smuggling followed in the Gulf region. In 1800 Missis-
sippi Territory had 8850 inhabitants, in 1810 it had 40,352, and in
1820 it had 75,448. In 1820 Alabama had a population of 127,901.
The former became a state in 1817, the latter in 1819.
Meanwhile, the west bank of the Mississippi was yielding to civiliza-
tion. In 1805 congress created the Territories of Orleans and Loui-
siana, respectively, south and north of the thirty-third de-
gree, the seat of power of one being New Orleans and of L("J1!JIa.na
the other St. Louis. They grew moderately. In 1810 JJuri< 1
Orleans had 76,556 inhabitants and in 1812 was admitted
to the union as Louisiana. At the same time Louisiana Territory
changed its name to Missouri. Thus by the end of the period under
consideration, 1783-1815, the vast Western region had been staked out
for the reception of a great number of inhabitants as far as the western
limit of the rich strip bordering the Mississippi, and just beyond Lake
Michigan in the extreme Northwest. It was not until near the middle
of the century that more westerly limits were staked out.
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
In the West, as in the older states, the chief industry was farming.
Raising food for the- inhabitants themselves was the first necessity of
colonies and frontier settlements. Beyond this they had
supplies for the outside world, sending them down rivers
to the Atlantic seaboard or to the Gulf port of New Orleans -m Europe,
from the Mississippi valley. The acquisition of Louisiana
gave a great stimulus to the latter region, because it opened to unques-
tioned use the great river across which Spain's hand in one way or
another was generally placed in restraint of our trade. The years
under consideration saw the rapid advance of manufactures in Eng-
land, which raised the price of English wheat and made it more profit-
able for Americans to send their grain abroad. Then came the long
period of European war, lessening the foreign food supply and drawing
on the American market at favorable prices. Spite of restrictions on
the carrying trade our exports of food products grew steadily.
But the most advance in American agriculture was in cotton produc-
tion. The interior parts of the St>uth were not adapted to rice, sugar,
or tobacco. Cotton they could raise, but the removal of the seed
was slow and expensive. In 1793 Eli Whitney, a native of Massa-
346 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
chusetts, a graduate of Yale, and for a time a schoolmaster near
Savannah, invented the cotton gin, next to McCormick's reaper the
most important agricultural machine now in use. It
(Hn C Save a Sreat impetus to cotton raising. From North
Carolina southward was an immense region, not well suited
to wheat production or grazing, and destined to slow development had
not this invention opened another possibility. As it was, the road to
wealth became suddenly broad and plain. Cotton was worth forty-
five cents a pound in England, and the recent development of spinning
and weaving there had made it possible to supply the world with great
quantities of cloth. In 1791 only 38 bales of cotton, of the modern
standard size, 500 pounds each, were exported from the United States.
In 1809 the whole crop was 218,723 bales, and in 1816 cotton exported
was worth $24, 106,000 and was by far our most valuable single export.
At that time the price was twenty-eight cents a pound.
The production of cotton stimulated the spread of slavery in the
interior parts of the South. Vast areas of cheap land awaited cultiva-
tion for a crop yielding a ready money return, and the
!f prv onlY lack was labor- White men might have worked
OlsLVcry. ii* • 1*1 11
them, but it was easier and quicker to employ slaves.
Besides, the social system already established in the South looked to
the creation of estates, not to a mass of small farmers; and for the
maintenance of estates a permanent laboring class was necessary. In
a new country, where the free laborer became a landowner with facil-
ity, slave labor was the only certain form of a permanent laboring
class. Thus, the introduction of cotton farming on a large scale, just
when slavery seemed in a way to be extinguished (see page 350), har-
dened the grasp of the institution on the far South, and checked the
growth of antislavery sentiment, then very strong, in the non-cotton-
raising slave states, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware.
Before the adoption of the constitution the state of our commerce
was confused, and statistics for it are unsatisfactory. In 1790 the
exports were worth $19,000,000. The war which soon
Commerce. , J -^ , . , y. -, -, ,, i
began in Europe stimulated our commerce both by raising
the price of products abroad and by making our merchants the pur-
chasers of the products of the French, Spanish, and Dutch colonies,
products reexported to Europe at a good profit. This colonial trade
was so profitable that complaint was made that it seriously injured
other industry by drawing to itself all the available capital in the
country. By 1795 our total foreign exports reached $67,000,000, of
which $26,000,000 were reexported products. The colonial trade was
irregular, but it rose generally, until in 1806 it reached a maximum at
$59,640,000, while the exports of domestic origin were then less than
$49,000,000. After that came restrictive measures at home and
abroad which reduced the total exports to an average of about $33,000,-
ooo. There was much speculation connected with commerce in its
COMMERCE AND FISHERIES 347
prosperous years, and the influence was probably bad. Merchants
took chances in whatever field seemed to offer opportunity, and ex-
pected to recoup themselves by one lucky stroke for the loss through
an unlucky one.
This rise in commerce was accompanied by similar progress in navi-
gation. Before the revolution more American ships were engaged in
the trade with the West Indies than in that with the British
ports in Europe. After the revolution the West Indian
trade was lost on account of the navigation laws, which
induced congress to establish restrictions of its own. In 1789 and 1790
it enacted discriminating duties in behalf of American ships, and the
consequent increase in American tonnage was so rapid that the British
shipowners were in consternation. Foreign traders then employed
41.19 per cent of all the tonnage engaged in our trade. It fell slowly,
until in 1795 it was only 9.7 per cent ; and from that time until the war
of 1812 its highest proportion was 17.2 per cent. Meanwhile, our
actual tonnage grew, until in 1807 it was eight times as great as in
1789. After that it decreased under the operation of our various
restrictive acts, but it recovered after the war, and in 1816 was 77.48
per cent of all the tonnage engaged in our foreign trade. The
statistics available show that far the larger part of this tonnage was
American built.
The fisheries also demanded governmental assistance. In colonial
days they yielded great profits and were encouraged by the mother
country as a breeding source of seamen. The treaty of 1 783
guaranteed the American fishermen the right to fish on
the Banks, and in territorial waters as well, but did not allow
them to dry fish on any but unsettled shores. Whatever advan-
tage lay in this was later neutralized by restrictions passed in England
forbidding the importation of the product of foreign fisheries and by
English bounties to fishermen. Loud complaints now arose from the
whale and cod fishers of America. Deprived of their best market, they
petitioned congress for aid, and so much was it felt that our own nurs-
eries of the sea should be sustained that one of the first steps taken
by congress under the constitution was to allow a drawback on
fish exported equal to the duty on the salt used in curing them. In
1792 the law went farther, and awarded a bounty in money to persons
engaged in cod fishing. Under its operation the industry revived and
became prosperous.
The embargo, the subsequent restrictions, and the war which
followed again checked the fisheries, to the great satisfaction of the
Canadians, who resented having to share the inshore
fishing with the Americans. In their behalf the British J^eries
government, in making the treaty of Ghent, sought to with- after* 1815.
hold the right. It held that the war ended the treaty
grants of 1783, and would not yield them again unless we allowed
348 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
British subjects to navigate the Mississippi. To this Clay, one of the
negotiators, objected so stoutly that the treaty as finally made was
silent on each question. It was, however, agreed that later negotia-
tions should settle the fisheries question. With the return of peace
Americans appeared in their old haunts only to be warned off by armed
vessels. They might fish, they were told, on the Banks, but they would
not be allowed within territorial waters. Then came negotiations,
the upshot of which was provisions in the convention of 1818 that
our fishermen might take fish off the Magdalen Islands, in the Gulf
of St. Lawrence, and along the most unsettled shores of Newfoundland
and Labrador, with the privilege of curing fish and getting certain
necessary supplies in uninhabited parts. On this basis the fisheries
continued with a restricted prosperity.
The years immediately following the revolution saw a sad disorder
in the currency. Exports were relatively small and much of the
foreign specie which had come into the country in the
rency channels of trade was drained out to pay balances. Seven
states sought to remedy the deficiency by a return to paper
money, or state notes, a form of currency forbidden in the constitu-
tion soon to be adopted. In 1791 a national bank was created with
a capital stock of $10,000,000. Its notes were issued cautiously, and
were gladly received everywhere. Its power to present for redemption
the notes of state banks enabled it to check overissue by such banks.
Thus the paper currency was sound until the charter of the bank ex-
pired in 1811. The bank asked for a continuation of its existence,
but the republican majority was very hostile, and would not even allow
an extension to wind up its affairs. Then a swarm of state banks
sprang up, each issuing its notes without restraint. The government
was soon at war, and, anxious to get money of any kind,
the War d? ^ave *ts ^on(^s ^or tnese insecure overissues, and received
1812. them for its dues, with the result that it lost $5,000,000 in
the process. In 1811 there were 88 state banks with a
total circulation of $22,700,000 : in 1816 there were 246, with circu-
lation of $68,000,000. This alarming inflation led to the incorpora-
tion of the second United States bank, 1816, and by 1820 the circula-
tion of the state banks had fallen to $40,641,574. In the panic which
followed the capture of Washington, 1814, all the banks south of New
England suspended specie payment and did not resume until 1817.
During the war of 1812 $36,680,000 of treasury notes were issued,
nearly half of which was outstanding at the end of 1815.
The last quarter of the eighteenth century brought a great revolu-
tion in the world's manufactures. Before that time weav-
Mamf ra m *n&' sPmnmg> nail-making, and most everything else was
factures. done by nancl in the homes of cottagers. But beginning
with Hargreaves's spinning jenny, 1764, several inven-
tions led to the power loom, by which the textile industry was shifted
BEGINNING OF MANUFACTURES 349
from the cottages of the operatives to the factory of the great manu-
facturer. The same thing happened in other lines, and the result
was the factory system, with its large outlay of capital and its peculiar
relation of employer and employees. This process was first established
in England, and it was well developed by 1800.
For a time no response to this English development was seen in
American industry. There was from colonial days a good deal of man-
ufacturing of the old kind, ironware, hats, shoes, nails,
and farm implements being some of the notable products.
The lack of capital, the profits of agriculture, and the abil-
ity of British manufacturers to undersell served to delay the America,
introduction of the new system. But spite of the difficulties,
some advance was made. In 1793, the year Whitney in vented the cotton
gin, Samuel Slater, in partnership with Moses Brown, set up at Paw-
tucket, Rhode Island, the first successful cotton factory in the United
States. It was supplied with machinery of the British design, and its
example was imitated in many other places, although the enterprises
struggled along with many drawbacks.
In 1807 began the restrictions of the importation of British mer-
chandise, lasting in one form or another until the war, which, with
the blockade that followed it, effectually shut out foreign
goods. Thus for eight years the American manufacturers Influence of
had the home market to themselves. The result was a b^go™nd
marvelous rise in manufacturing. In 1807 the cotton the War.
industry employed 8000 spindles, two years later it had
80,000; and similar progress was made in other lines. Among all
classes spread an enthusiasm for articles made in America, and poli-
ticians wishing to be popular appeared on public occasions in homespun
clothes. Since the failure in commerce resulted in much unemployed
capital and labor in the seacoast region of New England, it was here
that manufactures gained most rapidly. The proverbial Yankee
skill with machinery and the hard conditions of farming added to the
stimulus. At the close of the war New England supplied
a large part of the country's merchandise, and the agri- ??ects of
cultural South was sending thither $6,000,000 a year to fac^ri"ngon
settle balances for goods purchased at higher prices than it society,
formerly paid abroad. It seemed to the federalists a just
retribution that they who forced the war on the country should thus
be made to feel one of its burdens. The rise of manufactures created
a new class of rich men, less prominent in social and business matters
than the old aristocracy of commerce. Between the two classes there
followed sharp dissensions, but the manufacturers had greater natural
strength than their rivals, and with the aid of a protective tariff gained
so rapidly in wealth that ten years after the war they dominated the
policy of the government in relation to business.
350 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
SLAVERY MADE SECTIONAL
In 1776 slavery existed in all the states. Many of the colonists
wished to arrest its spread, but the British merchants protested, and the
king vetoed the restrictive colonial laws. The colonists
The Slave resented his action, and seized the first opportunity to act
Trade in the f themselves. In the "Association" of 1774 slave im-
Revolution- . if- e • i
ary Period, portations were forbidden, the nrst congress after inde-
pendence reasserted the restriction, and for the rest of the
revolution the trade was checked. After the war commerce generally
was controlled by the states, all of which but those in the far South
forbade the slave trade. There were vast unsettled regions in the
Carolinas and Georgia, and it was thought they must have negroes
to develop them. But even here the advocates of restriction won, and
by 1798 each of these states had forbidden further importations. The
constitution, it will be remembered, declared that congress could
not prohibit the trade before 1808.
Meanwhile, a movement for emancipation had swept over the
entire North. In this section were few slaves, and the opponents of
the institution needed only to organize the non-slavehold-
Emancipa- ers, a large majority, to carry laws for emancipation,
tioninthe Vermont led the way in 1777 by declaring slavery illegal
under Con- *n ^e k^ oi rights incorporated in her constitution, and
stitutionai New Hampshire did the same in the constitution of 1784.
Provisions; In each state the few slaveholders could only convert
their slaves into servants for wages or sell them out of
the reach of the state's jurisdiction. , The Massachusetts constitu-
tion of 1780 declared that "all men are born free and equal," and in
1783 the court in a test case held that this annulled a master's right to
the labor of his slave. Thus in three states the institution passed
quietly out of existence.
In others the cause of freedom encountered greater opposition, but
its advocates had recourse to the legislatures. Their request for eman-
b Statute cipati°n by state statutes was met with argument that
to free the slaves was to confiscate property. After
struggles of varying length, they carried each Northern state but one
for gradual emancipation, which meant that slave children born after
the enactment of the said statutes should be free on reaching a specified
age, usually twenty-five years. The first victory of this kind was in
Pennsylvania, chiefly through the efforts of the Quakers ; and it came
in 1780. Connecticut and Rhode Island followed in 1784, New York
in 1799, and New Jersey in 1804, The men of New York were not
satisfied with their achievement, and in 1817, when the power of the
slaveholders was much weakened, a law was carried for complete
emancipation after 1827. Delaware alone of the Northern states re-
tained slavery, and here it was safe until the end of the civil war.
OPPOSITION CHECKED IN THE SOUTH 351
The movement for freedom was felt south of the Mason and
Dixon line and was strong in Virginia, where Jefferson, Washington,
and many other leading men wished to rid the state of
an unprofitable form of labor and of the presence of an The Eman-
alien and undeveloped element of the population. But "Pation
i i i_ A ii i i Movement
here was encountered a more serious obstacle than had yet f ^s in ^
appeared. The small proportion of blacks in the North South,
involved no menace to the civilization there, were they
slave or free. But the people of Virginia knew not what to do with a
great mass of freed blacks. To leave them masters of their own actions
in the white population seemed to invite trouble, and to send them to
Africa, which many thought the only proper accompaniment of eman-
cipation, was so expensive that it was out of the question. These
objections proved fatal to the efforts of the more far-seeing ones ; and
thus it happened that two plans for abolishing slavery, one announced
in 1779 and the other in 1796, were found impracticable. At this
time the invention of the cotton gin had begun to have its effect on
slavery, making a great demand for slaves in the states to the south-
ward and raising the prices of them to such a point that masters felt
a growing unwillingness to part with such an important source of
wealth. Thus the seaboard states settled down to a free and a slave
section, a basis of opposition in interest which proved very fruitful
of later conflict. West of the mountains the same principle was
followed. By the Northwest Ordinance the Ohio divided slavery
from freedom between the Mississippi and the Alleghanies. Then
came the Missouri Compromise line for the Louisiana purchase ; but
eventually the matter no longer admitted of compromise.
From the beginning of the national government the South feared
the North would use her position in the union to restrict slavery.
There was warm debate when in the first congress petitions
for restrictions of the slave trade came from abolitionists,
The result was the adoption of a set of resolutions guaran-
teeing that slavery should be left to the jurisdiction of the states and
that the slave trade should be undisturbed before 1808. In 1793 a
fugitive slave law was passed. It gave the master the right to recover
an absconding slave by proving ownership before a magistrate without
jury or ordinary forms of law. The law was hard on the
slave, but it was necessary from his owners' standpoint.
To provide otherwise would enable the slave to have the
trial postponed, at heavy expense to the claimant, who
might at last lose the suit through the sympathy of a Northern jury.
On the other hand, it left the disposition of the freedom of a human
being to the irresponsible decision of the lowest rank of courts, a thing
not ordinarily allowed in the pettiest property suits. Later it was
charged that unprincipled men, by bribing some magistrates, carried
away to slavery negroes who were unquestionably free. The refleo
352 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
tion of the historian on this matter is that slavery at its best was an
unhappy relation, involving hardship in its primary and secondary rela-
tions, and supporting itself by destroying the commonest personal rights.
For some years after 1793 the question was not discussed in congress.
The Haytian insurrection of 1791 was accompanied by murder and
outrage, and a spasm of terror shot through the South and
Revived North at the thought of what might happen in our own
for°Shivesin ^anc^ ^ slaves once began to strike for freedom. By gen-
the South, eral consent it was thought well to let the subject alone.
But the approach of 1808, when the foreign slave trade
might be forbidden, reminded the South that it must act at once if
it recruited its slave supply before the doors were closed to importation.
In 1803, therefore, South Carolina repealed her law against the slave
trade. This brought protests from the North, and futile efforts were
made to get congress to lay an importation tax of ten dollars a head on
slaves. In 1806 Jefferson, always an enemy of slavery, took up the
cause, recommending congress to pass a law to prohibit the foreign
slave trade after January i, 1808.
The suggestion was acceptable to congress, but it was hard to agree
upon details, the greatest difficulty being the disposal of slaves illegally
brought in. To return them to Africa was impossible, the
tions'iFor- suggestion that they be liberated in the place of capture
bidden!* was resented by the Southerners, who would not have
free negroes among them, and the idea that they be sold
by the government was rejected by Northerners, since it made the
federal government party to slave selling and but increased the South's
number of slaves. After much discussion it was decided that such
slaves should be turned over to the state in which they were seized,
to be disposed of as it chose. The captured slave dealer should forfeit
ship and cargo, be fined from one to ten thousand dollars, and be im-
prisoned from five to ten years. To prevent irregularities, it was also
ordered that in the future the coastwise interstate slave trade
should be limited to vessels of forty or more tons and that the slaves
thus carried should be registered. The act of 1807 was to go into
force with the beginning of the following year. It was frequently
Smu lin violated. Slave prices now became higher than ever, and
adventurous slavers took cargoes into the isolated bays
and rivers of the un watched coast, where the planters, ever anxious to
get slaves, were as reticent as the smugglers.
RELIGIOUS DEVELOPMENT AFTER THE REVOLUTION
The English Church was established by law in Maryland, Virginia,
and North and South Carolina, although it had a real hold on the
people only in Virginia and South Carolina. In Massachusetts,
Connecticut, and New Hampshire the Puritan form of religion was
THE RELIGION OF THE PEOPLE 353
established by law. Only Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Rhode
Island had no state church. But the war brought a spirit of reli»
gious liberty, and at its end every establishment except
those of New England was swept away. The clergy of J.he,f ate.of
the English Church in America, bound by strongest ties ushments"
to the royal prerogative, had been generally loyal to the
crown. Most of them had left the country with the other tories, and
the old church, discredited by its opposition to the revolution, was in
a state of disintegration, a condition which afforded excellent oppor-
tunity for the dissenting churches to gather up the scattered frag-
ments.
The first to take advantage of the situation were the Methodists,
who appeared in the colonies about 1760. Their preaching was
popular, and their followers, though formed into "socie-
ties," were first considered members of the English Church. j^^Qdjstg
When that church was prostrate on account of the revolu-
tion, the " societies" appealed to Wesley, the father of the Methodist
movement, who in 1784 advised them to unite in one body, with su-
perintendents, who later were called bishops, and a system of church
government, called "the discipline." The result was the organization
of the Methodist Episcopal Church at Baltimore during the Christmas
holidays, 1784. The world has rarely seen a more zealous body of
leaders than the itinerant preachers who now began to penetrate to
the remotest settlements, kindling the imagination of the masses by
fervid appeals to the conscience, protraying the effects of irreligion,
and exalting the power of the spirit. Their most prominent leader
was Francis Asbury, a man of heroic zeal, aptly compared by his
followers with that other Francis, who in the thirteenth century filled
Europe with the echoes of his good deeds. In New England, where
Congregationalism was firmly rooted, the results were comparatively
small ; but in the Middle states and the South, and particularly in the
new communities of the West and Southwest, they had wonderful
success and made themselves a powerful agency in the lives of the
people.
Meanwhile the older non-episcopal churches extended their influence.
Most numerous, perhaps, were the Baptists, who were especially
strong in the South Atlantic states. In colonial times
they were generally Calvinists. Their government was
congressional and they were not held together in a general
organization. But the renewed religious life around them, together
with the common impulse toward union which came from the forma-
tion of a national government, led to the organization of a general
convention in 1814. One of the chief objects of this movement was
to promote missions, a thing to which those who held to the older forms
objected so strenuously that they gradually withdrew from the con-
vention. The seceders called themselves Primitive Baptists, while
2A
354 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
the others, a more numerous group, were called Missionary Baptists, in
contrast. It was a time of general religious activity, and resulted
in renewed prosperity of the Presbyterian, Lutheran, Quaker, and
other organizations, and several newer bodies, the results
Churches. °^ seParatmg impulses, now came into existence. The
Roman Catholics, at first strong in Maryland, and
planted in every large seacoast town, also began to increase in
numbers, chiefly through the accession of immigrants, many of whom
were from Ireland. In this manner did the leaven of nationality work
in the creation of a strong native American movement for the estab-
lishment, of the American type of religion.
All this had its effect on the English Church in America. Threat-
ened with extermination through the failure of its connection with the
Church of England, it began soon after the revolution to
The Prot- reorganize itself on an American basis. Its first need was
00*01* EP1S" a nati°nal organization, something it could not have in a
Church system which had for cardinal doctrine the ecclesiastical
Organized, supremacy of the English king. All efforts to secure the
creation of an American episcopate had failed before the
revolution, but peace was hardly made before they were renewed.
At last Samuel Seabury, of Connecticut, was in 1784 consecrated
bishop of Connecticut by three non-juring bishops in Scotland. Then
the British parliament gave way, and by act allowed the archbishops
of Canterbury and York to consecrate, in 1786, two American bishops,
and three years later these, with Seabury, completed in Philadelphia
the organization of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United
States. As the survivor of the English establishment, it had much
dignity in the new nation and embraced in its membership a large pro-
portion of the men of influence outside of New England, while the
Methodist, Baptist, and Presbyterian churches took place as the great
popular religious bodies.
Although Puritanism maintained formal hold on New England, it
was internally at the point of disintegration. Of its three factions,
these who held to strict Calvinism, and the "Hopkinsans,"
who were followers of Jonathan Edwards, and promoted
2isfs. ( missions and revivals, considered themselves more orthodox
than the third party, who were soon to be called Uni-
tarians. This third group was strong in the Boston churches and
among the wealthier class on the seaboard. They opposed revivals
and questioned so many of the orthodox principles that men began to
ask, "Shall we have the Boston religion, or the Christian religion?"
The controversy became warm in 1815 when it was known that leaders
of the party corresponded with the English Unitarians. The result
was a separation in many of the older churches and the open avowal
of Unitarian doctrines. The most eminent leader of the movement
was William Ellery Channing, of Boston. In 1825 the American Uni-
PURITANISM WEAKENING 355
tarian Association was founded with general oversight of the move-
ment. In the struggle against the Unitarians the two older factions
drew closer together, merged their doctrinal differences in a system
which became known as the New England Theology, and established
in 1808 Andover Seminary as the nourishing center of the faith.
Long before this the New England churches had been called "Con-
gregational," to distinguish them from other churches. The term
became of special significance in the West, where the large body of
New Englanders, planting their own religion, was thrown into con-
tact with other strong organizations. True to the congregational
form of government, they had no general law-making authority, but
their great common undertakings, as home and foreign missions,
were committed to general boards, which gave cohesion to the com-
mon movement.
One other reform needed to be made to modernize the religious life
of New England: it must accept disestablishment, already existing
in Rhode Island and in the Middle and Southern states.
Episcopalians, Baptists, Methodists, and every other in- Disestab-
dependent church, and eventually the Unitarians, de- ^ew^ng-0
manded a change. Defenders of the "Standing Order," i^d.
as the old system was called, pronounced the demand
irreligious and asserted that the power of truth against the reign of
evil would be destroyed if the state, by means of the public taxes,
ceased to support an orthodox and fearless clergy. As Jefferson was
the leader of disestablishment in the South, his political party,
the republicans, became defenders of liberalism in New England.
Similarly the Standing Order, that is, the town clergy, were stout
federalists. The battle was hard, but the orthodox party was worsted.
The first relaxation was a compromise, following a line which had
appeared in the colonial struggle between Puritans and Episcopalians.
It was provided that members of a dissenting church might be relieved
from taxes to support religion if they presented certificates that they
supported their own organizations. This did not benefit those who
were members of no church, and it was resented by all who believed
in the separation of church and state as a principle. So the struggle
went on until the liberals triumphed in state after state. Vermont
led the way and adopted complete separation in 1807 ; Connecticut
followed in 1818, New Hampshire in 1819, Maine in 1826, the year
she secured statehood, and Massachusetts after a long struggle in 1834.
EXPLORATION IN THE FAR WEST
Although the Mississippi was our western boundary in 1783, we
could not but be interested in the vast region beyond it. Owned by
Spain, as it was, its Indians might be a menace in war or a source of
profitable trade in peace. For many years our sole information about
3s6 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
them came from chance travelers and traders, and Jefferson, soon after
he became president projected an expedition which should secure
more reliable intelligence and establish, if possible, friendly
Clark ££? relati°ns with the Indians of the plains. Congress con-
patched. " senting, Captain Meriwether Lewis and Lieutenant
William Clark, with 43 men, soldiers and others, began to
ascend the Missouri on a voyage which was to make them famous. By
this time Louisiana had been purchased, and their exploration had thus
acquired added significance. They went into winter quarters near
the present town of Bismarck, North Dakota, where they met a squaw,
the "Bird Woman," formerly captured from the mountain tribes,
who with her husband agreed to accompany them.
In the spring they proceeded to the mountains, encountering many
difficulties of a physical nature. Here the savages avoided them
until it was discovered that the chief of the tribe was
Their Dis- brother of the "Bird Woman." Guides were now fur-
Oregon! " nished, with whose aid the explorers reached the tributaries
of the Columbia. Building canoes in the Indian fashion
they embarked, and November 7, 1805, reached the mouth of the river,
the Pacific ocean before them. The neighboring tribes were hardly
friendly, but the explorers built a fort for the winter, claiming the
country in behalf of their government. Next spring they returned
with many difficulties to the East, exploring, after they crossed the
mountains, the Yellowstone river and other tributaries of the Mis-
souri. They were men of intelligence, and their narrative of travel,
though full of the irregular spelling of the day, has come to be con-
sidered a classic among American books of exploration. Their dis-
covery furnished the most important basis of our claim to Oregon.
Another famous explorer of this period was Lieutenant Zebulon
Pike. In 1805 he explored the headwaters of the Mississippi, seeking
its source. He encountered many hardships in a winter
Journev and was forced to accept hospitality from agents
of the British Northwest Company, who were illegally
trading within our boundaries. The frozen condition of streams
rendered his conclusions about the headwaters of the great river un-
reliable. He was back at St. Louis in April, 1806, and in the following
August set out to explore the Arkansas and the Southwest. He
reached the Rocky mountains and penetrated them near the peak
which bears his name. His object is not definitely known, but it is
supposed that he intended to reach the Rio Grande and examine the
country east of it, which we claimed under the Louisiana purchase.
It was a great task, and he lost his way, suffered much from hunger
and cold, and at last fell into the hands of Spanish soldiers, who relieved
his wants, conducted him in a roundabout way through Texas, and
finally set him at liberty on the Louisiana border. Some of his follow-
ers were never heard of after they left him in an independent attempt
POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT 357
to return home. Pike published an interesting and very popular ac-
count of his travels. He was a brave man and rapidly rose to dis-
tinction in the war of 1812 until he met his death as brigadier general
at the capture of York, in 1813. His explorations in the Southwest
and those of Lewis and Clark in the Northwest appealed to the
American imagination and stimulated powerfully the desire to own
and settle the Far West.
EARLY CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION
The makers of the constitution expressed its meaning as clearly as
the limitation of language and the necessity of compromise per-
mitted. But however clear its meaning, it was to be ex-
pected that congress, president, and the states themselves T.he
would construe their rights under the new instrument,
each to its own advantage. The arbiter between such con- court,
tending interpretations was the supreme court, endowed
with the power to pass on cases arising under the constitution. It
could thus decide whether or not congress, state, or president im-
properly read the charter of government, and its decision was final. If
a question arose of its own power under the constitution, the court
passed on this also. Since final power must rest somewhere, it was,
perhaps, best to leave it with a small body of learned and unprejudiced
men. But many people of the day did not readily accept this view.
The three great spheres of government, they said, should be mutually
coordinate, and apparently it was so intended by the fathers.
Nothing short of a constitutional amendment could settle the dispute
clearly, and in default of that the court asserted final jurisdiction in
the matter under consideration.
At first the supreme court was not inclined to assert its powers,
partly because the judges were naturally cautious and partly because
they wished to avoid exciting criticism in the early years
of the union. But its attitude changed when, in 1801, The In-
John Marshall, of Virginia, became chief justice. This ^Ce °f
strong-willed and aggressive man, who believed the union Marshall,
ought to have the necessary power to execute its will,
was the controlling personality on the supreme bench from his appoint-
ment until his death in 1835. By his strong mind and character he
won to his views the associate justices, even the appointees of the re-
publican presidents, and laid down a large body of precedent on the
loose-construction theory of the constitution. "He was born," said
Pinkney, of Maryland, "to be chief justice of any country in which
he lived."
His first important decision of this nature was in the case of Mar-
bury vs. Madison. February 13, 1801, the federalists, about to relin-
quish power, created sixteen new federal judges, with the ordinary
35* SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
complement of marshals and clerks of court. The law was de-
nounced as unnecessary and as an attempt to fill the courts with
federalists before the republicans took control, and one
Madi^r °f the first acts °f the new administration was to get the
1803. law repealed. The original bill was passed so hurriedly
that Adams was not able to appoint and install the new
officials ere he gave lip his power. When the new secretary of state
took office, many of the commissions were found in the office undelivered ;
and Jefferson, holding that an appointment was not complete until the
commission was signed, sealed, and delivered, ordered that the commis-
sions should be withheld. He thought an appointment followed the
procedure of a deed. Marbury asked the supreme court to issue a
mandamus for the delivery of one of these commissions, and the matter
was argued in the supreme court. Marshall, who gave the opinion, held
that since the supreme court by the constitution did not have original
jurisdiction in such a case, Marbury had no right to bring suit in that
tribunal. This ordinarily would have ended the matter, but he went
on to say, and it was an obiter dictum, that a commission was not anal-
ogous to a deed, that Madison had no right to withhold one duly signed,
and that Marbury, if he had brought suit in proper form, would be
entitled to his office. The republicans denounced this decision as
partisan. But it had a still wider significance. Congress had pre-
viously passed a law giving the court the right to issue a mandamus,
and it was under that act that the suit was brought. In declaring the
contrary, therefore, the court had annulled a law of congress, and this
is the chief constitutional import of the decision.
In Fletcher vs. Peck the act of a state legislature was in question.
The assembly of Georgia had granted certain lands, and afterwards
declared the grant null on account of fraud. Peck claimed
*and under tnis annulled grant and brought suit in the
federal courts, urging that Georgia had violated the clause
of the constitution which forbids a state to pass a law "impairing the
obligation of a con tract. r Georgia put herself on her sovereignty
and replied that a land grant, made by the state in the disposal of its
domain, was not a contract. The court held, Marshall giving the
decision, that a grant is a contract and that the attempt of Georgia to
repeal the grant was illegal. Here the court declared unconstitutional
an act of a state legislature. But now appeared a difficulty which has
since then limited the power of the court. Who was to execute the
decision of the court against a state ? Ordinarily it would be the presi-
dent, but if he thought it advisable to decline to act, there was no
power to compel him. This happened to the decision in Fletcher vs.
Peck. Georgia thus defied the court, and the only way out of the diffi-
culty was the compromise, made in 1814, in which congress by pay-
ing money salved the feelings of the claimants under the Georgia
grants.
McCULLOCH vs. MARYLAND 359
These two decisions, it will be seen, were aimed at two doctrines
dear to the heart of the republicans. In the first it was held that the
popular will as expressed in a congressional law must be
restrained by the constitution: in the second the doc- Politicai As-
trine of state sovereignty was shorn of some of its power ; Decisions!
for Georgia's claim that the people of a state acting through
the legislature were sovereign in state affairs was made to yield to the
supremacy of the federal constitution. The supreme court, under
Marshall's leadership, was intent on establishing this general view, and
after the war of 1812 proceeded to do so in several other important
cases. Two of them are especially significant, and both were decided
in 1819.
First came McCulloch vs. Maryland, relating to the power of con-
gress under the "implied powers" clause of the constitution, article I,
section 8. Much popular opposition existed to the bank
of the United States, and several states passed laws to
tax its notes, one of them being Maryland. The bank re- land>
sisted the taxes, and the matter came before the supreme
court. Two questions arose: Has congress power to create a
bank ? and have the states power to tax a bank, if created ? Mar-
shall answered the first in the broadest possible manner. The govern-
ment, he said, has all the power implied in the act of its creation:
"Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the constitu-
tion, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted
to that end, which are not prohibited but consistent with the letter
and spirit of the constitution, are constitutional." If congress
should pass a law which by the constitution it may not pass, the court
would declare that law of no effect ; but if the court pretended to annul
a law of congress made in the field proper to the activity of congress,
the court would by that action enter the field of law-making, a thing
it had no right to do. As the creation of a bank was not prohibited
to congress, and as a bank was a thing useful in the happy and pros-
perous government of the nation, the court must hold that it was
within the power of the national legislature to establish it. As for
the second question, the right of a state to tax the bank, that was also
opposed ; for if a small tax could be laid, a large one could also be laid,
and thus the bank, lawful in itself, could be taxed out of existence.
"The power to tax," said Marshall in words long remembered, "in-
volves the power to destroy."
The second great case decided in 1819, and nearly as important as
the McCulloch case, was Dartmouth College vs. Wood-
ward. The New Hampshire legislature, in response to The Dart-
the political feeling of the day, wished to get control of ^ case
the college and amended its charter with that end in X8I9.
view and against the protest of the college authorities. Suit
was brought, and the case went before the supreme court, Webster,
360 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
a Dartmouth alumnus, appearing among the lawyers for the college.
Is a charter granted to a corporation inviolate by the legislature ? was
the question. The court held that a charter is a contract and not to
be recalled by the legislature provided the grantee observes the con-
ditions on which it was granted. The decision became a precedent in
all cases arising under acts of incorporation, a large part of modern
law. Under it banks, manufacturing, and many other kinds of cor-
porate companies have insisted that they could not be disturbed in
their business relations. As Marshall laid down the principle, the com-
panies seem to have had absolute immunity from interference, a posi-
tion quite contrary to modern ideas that corporations should be under
state control. This difficulty has been obviated by several subsequent
decisions by which it is held that a legislature may modify a charter
under the exercise of the police power, under its right to pass laws for
good morals, and on other grounds. These later decisions have
greatly modified the force of Marshall's ruling, but in ordinary cases
that rule still remains the great principle for the government of
corporations. It was, when made, a direct blow at the assumed right
of a state to limit the action of an individual through the exercise of
its sovereign power over him.
These decisions were received with indignation by the ultra repub-
licans. Victorious in the elections, masters of the executive and
legislative parts of government, they writhed to see the ju-
Significance diciary annul the will of the people as expressed in the elec-
sh^l?i)e- tions, while in decision after decision it completed a system
cisions. of centralized power greatly at variance with the principles
of the party which ruled. But for all their contempt,
Marshall did not quail. Doffing the neutrality of an ideal judge he
boldly set himself the task of shaping the constitution in its most
plastic period. His decisions became precedents in every court in
the land. They gave strength and steadiness to a government, which
by the nature of the case, was in the hands of the least competent
portion of its citizens. They saved popular government from the ef-
fects of radicalism while the ideals of conservatism struck root in the
crude but ripening society then spreading itself over the face of a new
continent. No greater deed of firm leadership has been performed in
our country than this persistent assertion of the vital will of the federal
republic.
Another case, Chisholm v. Georgia, decided that a state might be
sued by a citizen of another state. It displeased the states and re-
sulted in the eleventh amendment, 1798. Six years later the twelfth
amendment was in force, providing that electors should vote sep-
arately for president and vice-president.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 361
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
On the general social history of the period treated in this chapter the best work
is McMaster, History of the People of the United States, 7 vols. (1883-1910), contain-
ing many chapters of interest; Adams, History of the United States, vol. I (1889).
chaps. I-IV contain valuable accounts of social and intellectual conditions;
See also Bassett, The Federalist System, Chaps. X-XIII (1906); Hart, American
History Told by Contemporaries, III (1906) ; Simons, Social Forces in American
History, chaps. VIII-XII (1911) ; Fess, Political Theory and Party Organization in
the United States, chaps. I-V (1910) ; and Griswold, The Republican Court (1864).
On the public lands see Donaldson, The Public Domain (Pub. Land Comssn. Report,
1881) ; and Treat, The National Land System (1910),
Many European travelers visited America immediately after the revolution
and wrote and published their impressions of the country. A list of them with
critical discussions is found in Tuckerman, America and her Commentators (1864).
The most important works of this nature are : Brissot de Warville, New Travels
[1788] (1791, 1792), enthusiastically biased in favor of republicanism; Due de
Rochefoucauld-Liancourt, Travels . . . 1795-1797, 2 vols. (London ed. 1799), has
many facts, but the author did not understand American life ; Weld, Travels . . .
1795-1797, 2 vol. (1799) ; Campbell, Travels in the Interior . . . 1791-1792 (1793),
relates to New York, the Northwest, and Canada ; Dwight, Travels in New Eng-
land and New York [1796-1815], 4 vols. (1821-1822) ; Melish, Travels in the United
States, 1806-1807, 1809-1811, 2 vols. (1812); and Bradbury, Travels in the In-
terior . . . 1809, 1810, 1811 (1817). After the return of peace in Europe and
America came a revival of interest in immigration, and several foreigners who came
to the United States to investigate the conditions here wrote books which were
published for the instruction of those who proposed to emigrate. Among them
are: Fearon, Narrative of a Journey, etc. (1817); Birkbeck, Notes on a Journey
in America (1818) ; Ibid., Letters from Illinois (1818); and Cobbett, A Year's
Residence in the United States (1819).
Most of these travelers visited the Northwest and described conditions there
in frontier days. A general work of great excellence on the settlement of that
region is Matthews, The Expansion of New England (1909). See also : Turner, The
Rise of the New West (1906) ; Boggess, The Settlement of Illinois, 1778-1830 (Chicago
Hist. Soc. Collections, 1908) ; and Hinsdale, The Old Northwest, 2 vols. (1888, 1899).
Conditions in the South and Southwest are described in : Phillips, Georgia and
State Rights (Amer. Hist. Assn. Report, 1901, vol. II); Schaper, Sectionalism and
Representation in South Carolina (Ibid., 1900, vol. I) ; and Pickett, History of Ala-
bama, 2 vols. (1851, 1900).
On far western explorations see Thwaites, Rocky Mountain Exploration (1904)
for a good summary. Lewis and Clark prepared full notes of their explorations,
which were edited by Nicholas Biddle, later president of the second bank of the
United States. They appeared as History of the Expedition under the Command of
Captains Lewis and Clark, . . . 1804, 1805, 1806, Prepared for the Press by Paul
Allen, 2 vols. (1814). The best modern edition is edited by Thwaites in eight
volumes (1904-1905). It is a verbatim reproduction of all the journals kept by
the two leaders and other members of the expedition. Pike wrote an account of his
travels, published under the title, Account of Expeditions to the Soiirces of the Missis-
sippi. . . . And a Tour through the Interior Parts of New Spain, 2 vols. (1810).
The history of American industry has not been adequately written. Bassett,
Federalist System (1906) has a brief chapter on conditions from 1789 to 1801. A
longer and more general treatment is in Coman, Industrial History (1905, 1910) ;
and Bogart, Economic History of the United States (ed. 1907). See also Adams,
History of the United States, vols. V and VIII (1891) for the influence of manu-
factures; Seybert, Statistical Annals . . . 1789-1818 (1818) has many valuable
statistics on commerce. See also : Dewey, Financial History of the United States
(1903) ; Bishop, History of American Manufactures, 3 vols. (1864-1867) ; Bagnall,
362 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
Textile Industries of the United States, vol. I (1893), only one volume appeared;
Ibid., Samuel Slater and the Development of Cotton Manufacture ; Hammond, Cotton
Industry (Amer. Econ. Assn. Publications, 1897) ; and Swank, History of the Manu-
facture of Iron (ed. 1892).
On slavery the following are important: Locke, Anti-Slavery in America . . .
1619-1808 (1901) ; Du Bois, Suppression of the Slave Trade (1896) ; Ballagh,
Slavery in Virginia (1902) ; Brackett, The Negro in Maryland (1889) ; Bassett,
History of Slavery in North Carolina (Johns Hopkins University Studies, 1899);
and Kurd, The Law of Freedom and Bondage, 2 vols. (1858-1862).
No good general history of religion in the United States has been written from
the secular standpoint, and the student must rely chiefly on the histories of the
individual churches. Of these, perhaps the most satisfactory is the series known
as The American Church History Series, edited by Schaff and others. The following
volumes are especially valuable : Walker, The Congregationalists (1894) ; New-
man, The Baptists (1894) > Thompson, The Presbyterians (1895) ; Allen, The Uni-
tarians (1894); Tiffany, The Protestant Episcopalians (1895); and Carroll, The
Religious Forces of the United States (1893), a general introduction to the series.
Other works of importance are: Bacon, History of American Christianity (1897);
Buckley, History of Methodism, 2 vols. (1898); Cross, The Anglican Episcopate
and the American Colonies (1902) ; Pond, Sketches of the Theological History of New
England (1880-); Asbury, Journals, 3 vols. (many eds.) ; and Lauer, Church and
State in New England (Johns Hopkins University Studies, 1892).
On Marshall's great constitutional decisions the best work, perhaps, is Cotton,
editor, Constitutional Decisions of John Marshall, 2 vols. (1905), the decisions
given in extenso, accompanied by explanatory remarks by the editor. See also :
Thayer, Cases on Constitutional Law, 2 vols. (1895) ; Ibid., John Marshall (1901) ;
Magruder, John Marshall (ed. 1898) ; Story, Life and Letters of Joseph Story, 2
vols. (1851) ; Babcock, Rise of American Nationality, chap. XVIII (1906) ; and
Elliott, Biographical Story of the Constitution, chap. VI (1910).
For Independent Reading
Longstreet, Georgia Scenes (1897 and many earlier eds.) ; Irving, Captain Bonne-
ville (1849); Dana, Two Years before the Mast (1849); Smedes, Memorials of a
Southern Planter (1887, 1890); and Chittenden, The American Fur Trade of the
Far West, 3 vols. (1902).
CHAPTER XVH
THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
REFORMS OF 1816-1817
AMERICAN history comes to a new period in 1815. Before that year
our chief concern was foreign affairs. This was not through the desire
of the men of the day, but partly because the new nation
must first of all adjust its relation with other powers, and peri*J
partly because we could not rid ourselves of a connection
with the prolonged commotion in Europe. In 1815 all this was past,
and the government could give its attention to domestic affairs.
Another change was in leadership. For many years after the revolu-
tion the men in power were those who planned and won the struggle
for independence. They were anxious for the "experiment" of re-
publican government to succeed, and distrustful of federal centraliza-
tion. In 1815 a new group was in control. They had grown up dur-
ing the time when Americans thought more of the glory than of the
difficulties of the revolution. They had confidence in the future, they
were not afraid that a strong central government would destroy
liberty, and they were deeply conscious of the evils of weak government
as revealed in the experiences of the recent war. They were boldly
American, and took up the task of legislation with firm hands.
Their plan of reform contained four measures: i. All were agreed
that adequate provision should be made for the national defense.
The army and the navy, which to the old republicans were propose<i
useless and dangerous to liberty, were now placed on a Reforms:
respectable peace footing, and the military academy was i. National
remodeled on the plans of Washington as a place to train Defense.
officers for the army.
2. Next the second bank of the United States of America was in-
corporated, 1816, in order to aid the government in its financial opera--
tions and to establish a sound paper currency by creating
a check on the overissue of notes by the state banks. ge^jjj
Its capital was $35,000,000, one-fifth owned by the govern- Bank.
ment, which appointed one-fifth of the directors, and its
charter was to run for twenty years. The privileges were valuable:
its notes were receivable for government dues, it kept the deposits
of the government without paying interest on them, and it was exempt
from taxes. In return, it paid the treasury a bonus of $1,500,000, and
363
364 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
agreed to transmit public funds without cost. Five of the members
of the committee that reported the bank bill were Southerners, and
its chairman was Calhoun. He was then a young man of great promise,
popular because he defended the war, and likely to remain so because
he espoused all the features of the national program then before con-
gress. Many years later his own state, South Carolina, would not
support a national policy, and then he became the chief leader of the
Southerners. The bank opened its doors early in January, 1817, and
was able to bring the state banks to resume specie payment on Febru-
ary 20. It served so well to correct the state of the currency that the
circulation of the state banks fell from $68,000,000 in 1816 to $40,641,-
ooo in 1820. Its headquarters were in Philadelphia, but within a
year it had nineteen branches widely distributed.
3. The tariff of 1816. The curve of tariff rates in the United States
has two points of sharp ascension, one beginning in 1812, and the other
ini86i. The first tariff rate was about five per cent, and rose
Tariff6 gradually until in 1812 it was twelve and a half per cent.
To raise funds for the war it was now doubled with proviso
that it should fall to the former level a year after the return of peace.
The war being over, the newly established manufacturers were alarmed
lest the reduction of the duties should bring them into dangerous com-
petition with British manufacturers, who had accumulated vast stocks
of merchandise produced at cheap rates and selling so low that they
could break up the American competitors. The American manufac-
turers called on congress for .protection. The commercial interests,
who throve on free importation, opposed this request, but the republi-
cans supported it because they wished to make the nation independ-
ent of foreign supplies in time of war. They felt that it was for the
national interest to make our own supplies at home. As the com-
mercial interests had opposed the war and were mostly federalists,
they got little favor now. Thus was passed in 1816 a new tariff bill
continuing the war tariff with some modifications. It was intended as
a temporary measure, but when the manufacturers once got a taste of
protection they continually asked for more until many thought them
insatiable.
The tariff of 1816 was of Southern origin. The bill was reported
by Lowndes, of South Carolina, and supported by Calhoun and Clay.
The former war party, thoroughly national, was now
The South transformed into the new republicans, equally national.
Tariff of They represented the agricultural parts of the country,
1816. which had no selfish interest in a tariff, but they felt that
all might sacrifice something to be independent of Euro-
pean manufacturers. Later on they concluded that protection had
gone too far, and opposed it bitterly. In this change of attitude
the South, as the great non-manufacturing section, was most prom-
inent.
INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS 365
4. Another measure which aroused much interest was public aid in
constructing roads and canals, known as the policy of internal im-
provements. The war aroused much interest in the rich
lands of the Northwest, and peace was hardly established ' Internal
before a great movement of population, partly from Europe '
and partly from the East, set toward that region. Two
ways of reaching it appeared. One was by water, up the Mississippi
from New Orleans, a process which the use of steamboats on the great
river from 1811 made easier than before. The other was overland
from Philadelphia and the Potomac or through western New York to
the lakes. But roads and canals were too expensive for individual
effort. Moreover, they were of national ^benefit, and why, it was
asked, should not the federal government aid in their construction?
Would they not enhance the value of the public lands, and were they
not necessary to move troops to defend the frontier, both important na-
tional enterprises ? Thus originated the demand for internal improve-
ment, for fifteen years one of the great political questions of the day.
Against them two objections were found. Did the constitution
give congress power to raise money for such a purpose ? They could be
justified only under the general welfare clause, and all the objections
old strict construction school came to life to protest against to Internal
such a wide departure from their tenets. Secondly, they inprove-
were really local improvements. If the merchants of the
East, it was said, wished them as an outlet for their trade,
let them pay the bills. Pennsylvania and the adjacent states were
chiefly concerned, and they ought to pay the cost of these very ex-
pensive works. The second argument appealed very strongly to the
more remote states, which had constructed their own works and
hoped for little of such aid from the general government.
Before 1816, in fact, as early as Jefferson's presidency, appropriations
for such a purpose had begun on a small scale. But now the demand
was for larger appropriations, and it was likely to grow with time until
every community would have its own scheme, pushing it „
so skillfully by log-rolling in congress that it was impossible ^0^g »
to say where the scheming would stop. Most of the rep-
resentatives from the West and from the Middle states were of the
internal improvements group, and several of the leading new republi-
cans gave support.
Among them the most conspicuous leader was Calhoun, who in
December, 1816, as chairman of a committee on internal improve-
ments, introduced a bill to set aside the $1,500,000 bonus
from the newly established bank as a perpetual fund for Bme
constructing roads and canals. He declared that roads
and canals were needed to bind together the East and West and to
prevent disunion. Clay also favored the project, and it passed both
houses by safe majorities. Madison had declared himself for internal
366 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
improvements, but at last he vetoed the bonus bill because he thought
the constitution did not authorize such an expenditure. He was
ever a strict obstructionist, and the arguments of the opponents of
the bill aroused all his fears. In his veto message, however, he sug-
gested that an amendment to the constitution might well be proposed
in order to avoid the difficulty he foresaw. In the existing condition
of parties such an amendment could not be carried, and for a time the
demand for internal improvements at national expense was checked.
Roads and canals continued to be built, some by the general govern-
ment, and many more by the states. Virginia and South Carolina
authorized large undertakings, and at this very time
Pennsylvania had spent over $2,000,000 for the same
mentTby purpose. But the great achievement was in New York,
the States. Much earlier than this her statesmen had realized the need
of a canal from the Hudson to Lake Erie, Albany to Buffalo,
across that depression between the Alleghanies and the Adirondacks
which nature had provided as the easiest way of getting from the sea-
board to the lake system in the heart of the continent. Many plans
had been made, and something was about to be done when the war be-
gan and deferred further effort. In 1816 De Witt Clinton was elected
governor of the state. He was strongly in favor of the canal and won
the legislature to the undertaking. Ground was broken July 4, 1817,
and eight years later the task was completed at a cost of $7,000,000.
The Erie canal was 363 miles long, and was the greatest engineering
feat in the country up to that time. It lowered freight to the West,
brought a rich trade to New York city, and enabled that port to
wrest from Philadelphia the distinction of being the metropolis of the
New World.
1816 was presidential election year, and Monroe was to have his
reward. Many republicans objected to the bargain. Some
thought Monroe too theoretical, others distrusted him
because he deserted old friends to enter the cabinet, some
of the strait Virginia school could not forgive his early support of
Randolph, and the Clinton-Smith faction had ends of their own in
MONROE AS PRESIDENT 367
view. This opposition united on William H. Crawford, of Georgia, a
man of real leadership, a student of Gallatin's financial policy, and an
astute politician. For a moment it seemed that Crawford would se-
cure the nomination, but when the caucus met means had been found
to change the New York members to Monroe, who was chosen by a
vote of 65 to 54. Tompkins, of New York, was nominated for vice-
president, thus restoring the New York- Virginia alliance which the
defection of Clinton in 1812 disrupted. Later in the year Crawford
became secretary of the treasury, and whisperers said that it had a
bearing on the succession. The federalists nominated Rufus King
for president, but in the election he got only 34 votes to Monroe's 183.
The Hartford convention and the national program of the new re-
publicans had proved too much for the federalists.
PARTY CLEAVAGE UNDER MONROE
Monroe's best quality was conciliation. By bringing factions to-
gether, by calming the feelings of disappointed men, and by avoiding
the initiation of positive measures, he held together for
eight years a party which had no opposition and which Monroe
contained many possibilities of disruption. "The tall
and eel-like Monroe," as a scoffer called him, who had no cure for
social hypochondria and only wished to solve the difficulties he en-
countered, gave the country eight years of political peace, which is
more than one says of any other American president.
He wished to bring into his cabinet the strongest of the new re-
publicans. John Quincy Adams was recalled from diplomatic service
abroad to become secretary of state, an office he filled with
distinction; Crawford was retained as secretary of the
treasury ; Clay was offered the war department, and when
he refused it, the office went to Calhoun, while William Wirt, an able
lawyer, popular with the old republicans, was made attorney-general.
Clay's refusal was the only discordant note. He would have taken
first place if it had been offered ; but he thought it advisable to de-
cline the third place and remain speaker of the house to become leader
of the opposition sure to develop.
The opportunity he anticipated came speedily. Since 1810 the
Spanish-American colonies had been in revolt. They had overcome
the weak Spanish garrisons, but were not able to establish
effective governments in the large and sparsely settled
areas over which their authority stretched. Much sym- America,
pathy for them existed in the United States, particularly
in the Mississippi valley ; and the Gulf ports freely furnished them aid
until congress in 1817 passed a more stringent neutrality act. In
1817 the question of recognizing the independence of these colonies
was brought up, but the cautious Monroe, rather than offend their
368 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
many sympathizers, sent agents to see if the revolutionists deserved
recognition. Clay introduced resolutions to accord recognition and
to repeal the recent neutrality act, supporting them in a beautifully
ornate speech. The administration men united against him, and his
resolutions were overwhelmed in the house. But he had done all he
could expect; for he had given fair warning to the country that he
was leading an opposition, and henceforth all who had grievances
against Monroe gathered under his banner. In the winter of 1818-
1819 he repeated his action, when the administration was forced to de-
fend Jackson's invasion of Florida but again the administration co-
horts defeated him.
By such means Monroe resisted attacks and came to the election of
1820 without a defeat. There was no thought of denying him the
honor of a reelection, — not even Clay went that far, — and
Good Efa °f ne was cnosen without opposition. However, one elector
Feeling." wno favored him had the whim to throw away his vote
on another man, lest Monroe should share with Washington
the honor of a unanimous vote. This period of harmony was called
"The Era of Good Feeling." The thought pleased the president, and
he tried to promote it by what he called his "amalgamation policy,"
which was to appoint both federalists and republicans to office. His
party friends resented the policy, and he was too wise to insist upon
it. Already men were beginning to look to 1824, and although the
cabinet was officially harmonious, it contained three men who were
keenly planning to contest the prize of the presidency when the time
came.
THE ACQUISITION OF FLORIDA
Jefferson was our first president who tried to buy Florida, but he
made no progress in his plan. While Napoleon occupied Spain, we
received no minister from that country, but diplomatic
tions with relations were resumed with the reestablishment of the old
Spain™ monarchy, and our minister at Madrid renewed the offer
to buy the province. He had a polite refusal, but shortly
afterwards a political upheaval in Spain brought a new ministry into
power, and the envoy in August, 1817, was surprised to receive an
offer to exchange Florida for Louisiana. The proposition was in-
admissible, but it indicated that Spain was yielding. Secretary
Adams now took the matter into his own hands, carrying it on with
success, until in June, 1818, diplomacy was rudely interrupted by
news that Jackson had invaded West Florida, seized its fortified posts,
and expelled its governor and garrison. The information referred to
the Seminole war.
The Seminoles were a Creek tribe, living in Florida. To them in
1814 fled a large number of Creeks, escaping the vengeance of Jackson
at Horse-Shoe Bend. When the treaty of Fort Jackson in August of
THE SEMINOLE WAR
369
the same year ceded a great deal of the Creek patrimony to the United
States, these fugitives protested against its legality. The reply was
that they had due notice to attend, and failing to do so
had no right to object. The treaty of Ghent provided Cause of
that the United States should give up all the land taken Discontent,
from Indians at war when the treaty was signed. The
fugitives were advised by some officious British subjects that this
applied to their land and promised that England would support them
GULF OEM E jc ico
THE GULF REGION
1812-1818
in a demand for its restoration, but the British government repudiated
the promise at sight. The whites held that they were exempt from
the clause in question because the Creek war was terminated by
the treaty of Fort Jackson. They disliked greatly the British subjects
whose assurances had rendered the Seminoles warlike. One of these
persons was Alexander Arbuthnot, a Scotch trader, who wrote the
letters in which the Indians delivered their protests, and the other was
2B
370 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
Captain Ambrister, an army officer who for the love of adventure
drilled an Indian company and led it to war. Hostilities began when
the savages raided the white settlers on the disputed lands. In
November, 1817, the Americans retaliated by burning Fowl town, killing
four of its Indian inhabitants, and dispersing the rest, who fled into
Florida.
The war department, Calhoun being secretary, now authorized a
campaign against the Seminoles, and Jackson, commander of the
southern military division, took command. His orders
Florida.0 ' avowed him to follow the enemy into Spanish territory,
but forbade him to attack a Spanish post. He considered
this limitation unwise, and in a letter to Monroe suggested that he pri-
vately be given permission to attack the forts if the Indians took refuge
in them. He claimed afterwards that he received the required au-
thority, but Monroe denied that assertion. On it hinged the question
of Jackson's responsibility for what was about to happen. He marched
straight into Florida, took the forts at St. Marks and Pensacola, sent
their garrisons with the governor of West Florida to Havanna, and
raised the American flag over the province. At St. Marks he captured
Arbuthnot and Ambrister, tried them by court martial, and hanged
them forthwith, spite of their British citizenship. Two prominent
Indian chiefs, who were also captured, were hanged without the for-
mality of trial.
These occurrences caused consternation in Washington, where
foreign complications were feared. England was at first inclined to
protest against the execution of her subjects, but as they
Erfiandand were wnere tney ^&d no business to be, the event was
Spain. allowed to pass. To appease Spain was not so easy.
She demanded the surrender of the province and the
punishment of Jackson. The first was readily granted, but the action
of the general pleased the people, and the administration dared not make
him suffer. The secretary of state was, therefore, intrusted with
the task of bringing Madrid to reason. In some bold and able dis-
patches he justified the invasion on the evident ground that Spain had
not properly preserved the neutrality of her territory. She had un-
doubtedly given encouragement, if not aid, to our enemies, and she
could not well complain if at last we did what she herself ought to
have done. Adams drove this point home with so much energy that
Spain accepted the situation, and the waters of diplomacy were at
length unruffled. For a time Jackson resented what he took for a re-
flection on his conduct, but some skillful touches by Monroe brought
him to accept in a reasonable spirit the solution of the difficult
situation.
At this junction the opposition took up the matter. Resolutions
were introduced in each house to investigate the violation of neutrality
obligations, Clay taking a prominent part in their defense. Those
MISSOURI AND STATEHOOD 37I
before the house occasioned a long debate, at the end of which
Jackson was acquitted of wrongdoing. The senate referred the
matter to a committee which made an adverse report,
but by this time popular opinion ran so strongly for the
hero of the invasion that the opposition did not press
the report to a vote. The upshot was that Jackson,
already mentioned as a presidential possibility, gained rather than
lost in the public esteem.
Before this phase of the Seminole affair was complete, the negotia-
tions for the purchase of Florida were resumed. Recent events
served to promote them by showing Spain by what a
slender hold she possessed the province, and she now came
to a decision to cede. February 22, 1819, the senate re-
ceived a treaty to that effect and passed it with little hesitation. It
provided that we should pay claims against Spain amounting to not
more than $5,000,000, and take all Florida. It fixed the western
boundary of Louisiana at the Sabine river. The latter point had
been in dispute since the purchase of Louisiana. By that bargain our
claim to the Rio Grande was good, but the president thought we
might safely relinquish it in view of the advantage of having an un-
broken coast line from the Atlantic to the Sabine. Congress took the
same view, but when the Texas boundary question came up more
than twenty years later Monroe received much criticism because he
had thrown away our claim to the rich region between that river and the
Sabine. The treaty of 1819 was not ratified by Spain until late in
1820. July 17, 1821, the province was formally handed over to the
United States and Jackson became its first American governor. It was
made a territory, and in 1845 was admitted into the union as a state.
THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE
In 1812 Missouri became a territory, with a legislature of its own,
and a population of something more than 20,000. St. Louis, at the
junction of the Missouri and Mississippi, was the center of
activity, its chief industry being the rich fur trade of the Develop-
Missouri valley. Three-fourths of its 2 500 inhabitants were JJisrouri
French, proud of their origin and resentful of the aggres- before 1820.
sive Americans who established the laws of the English and
offended the common taste by paving the streets and introducing
rattling, iron-wheeled vehicles. The clash between the two civiliza-
tions was of short duration. The French were contented with their
state, fond of amusements, in every house a fiddle and on every night
a dance, and they accepted with satisfaction a paternal form of society
which embraced a benevolent ruling class and a large number of care-
free dependents. The Americans were ambitious, eager for wealth,
forever busy and boastful of their patriotism, and bent on establishing
372 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
self-government for the bustling white immigrants who felt their
responsibilities as builders of a new commonwealth. The tide of
immigration was strong after the war of 1812 ; for stories of fertile
lands in what from its position must certainly be a great state attracted
many settlers from the East. They came chiefly from the South,
passing through Kentucky and Tennessee in long wagon trains ac-
companied by their slaves and cattle. By 1820 the population was
66,586. It was the first, and for many years the farthest, advance of
the white man's civilization into the great mid-continental plain be-
yond the Mississippi.
We have seen that by 1800 the states north of Maryland, i.e. north
of the Mason and Dixon's line, had restricted slavery, and those to the
southward continued slave states. By the ordinance of
Division of 1787 the Ohio was made the dividing line between freedom
in^Respect an<^ slaverv f°r the region beyond the mountains; and
to Slavery, thus the country between the Atlantic and the Mississippi
was amicably divided between the two great interests.
Nothing was done about a similar division when Louisiana was ac-
quired or when territories were first created within its bounds. In the
absence of restrictions the slaveholders felt they had equal rights
there with other Americans, and they were a large part of the popula-
tion of Missouri when in March, 1818, congress was asked to make the
territory a state. No action was taken at that time, al-
though under the rule that a territory could expect state-
Statehood, hood when it had 60,000 inhabitants, there should have
been no objection to the request. The petition was re-
newed in the next session, and in February, 1819, the house was con-
sidering a state bill when Tallmadge, of New York, offered an amend-
ment to exclude further introduction of slaves into Missouri and grad-
ually to emancipate those already there. After a short and angry
debate, the amendment was carried in the house, but lost in the senate.
This discussion lasted but two weeks. It was unexpected, and pro-
duced violent commotions. Whenever slavery had been discussed
before that in congress, hot words had been used ; for some
°^ *ts °PPonents would denounce it as a crime and some of
Debae. its defenders would reply bitterly. The quieter men,
North and South, had usually agreed to avoid occasions
for excitement, and the number of free and slave states was equal.
With the admission of Alabama, then imminent, there would be eleven
free and eleven slave states. It was to the interest of the new repub-
licans and of every man who had hope of being president in 1824 to
keep in abeyance a question which would surely realign political
groups and make impossible the enactment of such national measures
as tariffs and bills for internal improvements. Jefferson said the
debate was "like a fire-bell in the night." The leaders of the party,
therefore, regarded with apprehension the hot discussion and the
THE COMPROMISE CARRIED 373
voting of warm resolutions by public meetings and legislatures North
and South through the summer of 1819.
The question was intimately related to that sectional jealousy which
to this time had not been entirely absent from most of the deliberations
of congress. The rule of Virginia was distasteful to New
England, and even the New York republicans, though Sectional-
partners in that rule, were restless under it. Tallmadge, jsm tlje
who introduced the resolution, was a close friend of Clinton, Northern *
and Rufus King, leading defender of it, was an old federalist Side,
of New York. To the men of the North it seemed that
Southerners, by extending their peculiar institution into the great
Northwest, would establish their power in the Missouri valley and
eventually lay hands on all the region west of it. If such a thing was
to be prevented, it must be prevented now. If this advance was
allowed, there would be a union of the South and the great Northwest,
slavery being the common bond which would dominate the future as
relentlessly as the Virginia combination ruled the present. Besides
this feeling, there was in the North a growing conviction that slavery
was a blot on our civilization, and ought to be restricted in area. A
small number of Northern people even declared that slavery was a
crime and slaveholders criminals. Thus the Southern supremacy in
the government was attacked by a powerful combination which
threatened to take from it all its support in New York, Pennsylvania,
and other Northern states.
Several combined interests existed in the South. Its leaders desired
to perpetuate Southern control, in order to ward off unfavorable
legislation ; they also felt that the growing immigration into the free
North would enable that section to people quickly the vast West
and establish control in congress. Such a result achieved, it was
not doubted that an attempt would be made to amend the constitu-
tion with regard to the three-fifths representation of
slaves, and perhaps efforts would be made to abolish slavery
itself. Besides these considerations, many Southerners were
irritated when told that slaveholding was a crime. Their best people
owned slaves, and everywhere were seen efforts to make the lot of the
blacks as happy as the necessities of bondage permitted. Thus it was
that sentiment North and South through the summer of 1819 hardened,
and practical leaders became convinced that only a compromise could
prevent a general disarrangement of existing party alignments.
January 3, 1820, four weeks after the new congress met, the house
passed a bill to admit Maine. Massachusetts, which formerly had
authority over Maine, had consented to this action pro-
vided congress approved before March 4, 1820. Earlier
in the session Alabama was admitted, so that the admission promise.
of Maine would give the free states a majority. The
situation suggested a compromise, and when the Maine bill reached
374 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
the senate, it was combined with a bill then before that house to admit
Missouri without restriction. This step was approved by the senate
by a vote of 23 to 21. Then Thomas, of Illinois, moved to amend by
admitting Missouri with slavery and by prohibiting slavery north of
36° 30', north latitude, in the rest of the Louisiana purchase. Here
was the compromise that conservative men wished. It was much
like that by which the Northwest was reserved to freedom in 1787
while the Southwest was left to slavery. It would remove the many
dangers for persons and measures, and it passed the senate by a vote
of 34 to 10. The house had a safe majority for restriction, and was
disposed to throw away every thought of other ends to place slavery
in a way of extinction,- and voted to reject the senate compromise.
It seemed that a complete deadlock was reached, when a conference
committee was at last appointed. Then came further relenting, until
enough members yielded to carry the compromise by a majority of
three. Of the 87 who made the minority 33 were from New England,
46 were from the Middle states, and 8 were the solid Northwestern
delegation. No Southern or Southwestern representative voted for
restriction in Missouri, and 7 New Englanders and 8 Middle states
men voted against it. The Missouri Compromise was the work of
moderate men, chiefly those who lived in the Middle states and in
the northern tier of Southern states. Many years later the South
attacked the compromise, and pointed to the fact that it was not
accepted by those Southerners who, as it was then put, were true
to the rights of the South in 1820.
This debate aroused the Missourians, thoroughly under the control
of the slaveholders ; and the constitution they framed reflected their
determination to hold the state. It guaranteed the existence of
slavery in the new state and forbade the immigration of free negroes.
When in the succeeding autumn it came before congress
The Mis- £or approval, it was opposed by the Northern members of
stitutum. " tf16 house, who declared that it violated the federal consti-
tution. There was a hot debate over the right of con-
gress to shackle a sovereign state, and the result was deadlock. Clay
took a prominent part in the first compromise, and he now came for-
ward with another. He induced the legislature of Missouri, then in
session, to agree that the objectionable clause should never be con-
strued to lessen in Missouri the rights of citizens of other states, and
with that the constitution was approved.
One other difficulty appeared. Missouri, assuming that statehood
was complete, chose presidential electors in 1820 favorable to Monroe,
and the returns were sent to the senate. The Southerners
" Pacffica favored their reception on the ground that Missouri be-
tor *° came a state by the first compromise act, March, 1820.
If this was allowed, the restriction on her constitution was
illegal, and the North accordingly insisted that the returns be rejected.
THE SOUTH AMERICAN STATES 375
Here was the possibility of an angry dispute, but Clay again smoothed
the difficulty, proposing that the result be announced in words like
these: If the vote of Missouri be counted, Monroe had 231 votes; if
not, he had 228 votes, and in either case he was elected president.
For his work in these compromises Clay was called the " Pacificator,"
a title which pleased his friends. It was considered a great thing to
bring jarring factions together and to avert the threatened dangers
of disunion.
THE MONROE DOCTRINE
Monroe's unwillingness to recognize the independence of the South
American states in 1817 was based on his conviction, shared by Secre-
tary Adams, that the revolutionists had not established a
settled government, and on the feeling that rash action in South
this respect would imperil the plans of purchasing Florida. R™o^zed.
By 182*2 these two reasons were not operative. Florida
was secured, and continued successes by the South Americans had made
it certain that Spain, unassisted by other European powers, would not
be able to reconquer what she had lost. Meanwhile, Clay continued
to agitate for recognition, and aroused such enthusiasm that congress
early in 1821 resolved that it would support the president whenever he
thought fit to extend recognition. Monroe delayed a year and then
yielded, notifying congress on March 18, 1822, that he would send
ministers to the new states when money was provided for the expenses.
Immediate action on the question was retarded by a far more com-
plicated aspect of the matter in the field of general diplomacy.
England had watched the South American revolutions with great
interest. Having lost the North American colonies as an outlet of
trade, she wished new markets in the new republics of the
south. All the efforts of the revolutionists had been made
. . e
with her assistance, sometimes covert, but oiten open.
Her fleet gave important aid on the Pacific, and her citizens sold sup-
plies to the insurrectionary armies. When the European wars were
over, the nations of the Old World united in the Holy Alliance to re-
store the conditions existing before the European upheaval, and began
to think of helping Spain to regain her colonies. This would upset
the commercial plans of England, and she gave notice that she would
not cooperate in the matter. But the other powers were disposed to
act of themselves, and England, not wishing to oppose them alone,
thought of uniting with the United States to prevent such action.
George Canning, the minister whose rude attitude did so much to
bring on the war of 1812, was now head of the British foreign office.
He turned to Monroe, who was keenly alive to what was going on, and
suggested, August 16, 1823, that he unite with England in declaring
that Europe should not extend her possessions in the western hem-
isphere. At that time France was subduing a liberal revolution in
376 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
Spain, and it was believed that the Spanish monarch, too weak to pay
for the service in money, would allow France to indemnify herself
by seizing the South American states.
Adams only half approved Canning's suggestion. He did not like,
as he said, the idea that his country should "come in as a cock-boat
in the wake of the British man-of-war." If we undertook
of Adams& to save ^e South American states, it was, he thought,
more in keeping with our dignity that we act on broad
principles announced on our own initiative. The knowledge that
England at that time had designs on Cuba and that Russia was seeking
to get recognition of a very shadowy claim to the Pacific coast south
to the fifty-first degree of latitude convinced him that it was time to
take a positive stand. Clay's continual appeals in behalf of a repub-
lican system in America with an eye to the recognition of the South
American states had prepared the country to support such a policy as
the secretary had in mind. It was out of such conditions that the
Monroe Doctrine had its origin.
Adams's determination was reached after many months of negotia-
tions. Monroe must have been cognizant of what was done, and he
gave it his approval. His cabinet were freely consulted,
an<^ ^e members also accepted the ideas of the strong-
willed secretary of state, who was at his best in asserting
the dignity of his country. And Canning himself could not object;
for it was the United States, and not England, which was most con-
cerned in the step about to be taken. His boast some years later
that he "called a New World into existence to redress the balance
of Old" was not entirely true. His suggestion was doubtless of great
importance, and the cooperation of England was essential, but the
Monroe Doctrine was an American doctrine and was designed to operate
as much against English as continental aggression. He had little
confidence in the ability of the United States to enforce their policy
to the exclusion of England, and seems to have thought that in future
emergencies England would manage to plant herself firmly in South
America, a hope which the strong spirit of our government was to
make ineffective.
The policy of the United States being formed, it only remained to
place it before the world, and the annual message of 1823 was selected
as a fitting means. It reached congress December 2 and
asserted in clear and simple language two interrelated
nounced" purposes, one referring to the New World and the other
to the Old. The language of the message is worthy of
perusal by all Americans. "In the wars of the European powers, in
matters relating to themselves," it runs, "we have never taken any
part, nor does it comport with our policy so to do. It is only when
our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries
or make preparation for our defense. With the movements in this
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES 377
hemisphere we are of necessity more intimately connected, and by
causes which must be obvious to all enlightened and impartial ob-
servers. The political system of the allied powers is essentially differ-
ent in this respect from that of America. . . . We owe it, therefore,
to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United
States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt
on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere
as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or
dependencies of any European power we have not interfered, and shall
not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their
independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have,
on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could
not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or
controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European
power in any other light than as a manifestation of an unfriendly
disposition toward the United States."
THE ELECTION OF 1824
December 3, 1822, an observer in Washington described the politi-
cal situation there in these words : "While he who now fills the halls
of the White House is slowly closing his eyes upon the rich
trifles of the world, like an old father he stands surrounded
by three full-grown sons, each seeking the inheritance cabinet.
on his departure. John Q., from the favors bestowed by
the old man in his lifetime, has been deemed a favorite always : J. C.,
however, from being possessed of a sanguine temper, sets up also pre-
tensions to the inheritance. William and the old gentleman, you
know, it has been reported, are constantly disagreeing in opinion and
are hence not quite so friendly as father and son should be ; be this
as it may, it seems pretty well settled that the Virginia estate, if not
already done, will be apportioned to the Latter." These words well
describe the opening of the campaign of 1824, but they do not mention
two other candidates, Clay and General Jackson.
Of the five aspirants Adams had the support of New England and
some strength outside of it in sections where the federalists had been
strong. Crawford was the heir of the old organization
which directed the Virginia-New York alliance, now sadly
shorn of its power. Every other candidate made inroads candidates,
on it. Calhoun took South Carolina, and Pennsylvania
seemed his through his support of internal improvements. Clay had
Kentucky and was accorded the new states north of the Ohio with
Missouri and Louisiana. Jackson had Tennessee, and was making
hard efforts to shame North Carolina out of her old practice of following
Virginia blindly. Thus, in getting the old organization, Crawford
got little more than his own state, with Virginia, and the support of the
378 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
anti-Clintonian faction of New York republicans. In so confused a
state of party no one expected any candidate to have a majority of the
electoral votes, and an election by the house of representatives seemed
likely.
Before the campaign closed, Calhoun was eliminated as a contestant
for first place. He had counted on Pennsylvania because the politi-
cians there were for him. But Jackson, whose candidacy
Calhoun was announced late, gathered strength with the people
Second °^ ^e state> anc^ tne politicians early in 1824 came to
Place. realize that they could not carry Calhoun to vic-
tory. They quickly took up Jackson, and Calhoun,
anxiously waiting to hear that this great state had declared for
him, was astonished to learn that it had been swept over to
Jackson. It was fatal to his hopes, but he calmly acquiesced in
a plan to make him vice-president, and in that field he had little
opposition. His decline in position implied the improvement of
Jackson's chances.
Crawford was generally esteemed the leading candidate until a
stroke of paralysis laid him low in September, 1823. His friends de-
clared it was slight, his enemies said he was at death's
door. Neither assertion was correct, but he was an in-
valid all through the year 1824, and was, in fact, not physi-
cally strong enough to come back into active national politics. The
organization which had adopted him strove hard to hold its grip on its
following, and was so successful that in the election he had the third
place among the candidates.
As the organization candidate he would naturally have the strongest
following in the republican caucus, hitherto a strong recommendation.
To overcome this advantage his opponent united to break
th^Caucus down the caucus. This piece of party machinery was un-
democratic, and tended to make the presidency subservient
to a congressional ring. It had been tolerated only because it was
the sole attainable means of securing concentration of purpose in a
largely disorganized party group. To oppose it, nomination by state
legislatures was now resorted to. Various states recommended their
favorites to the people and issued severe criticisms of the caucus
system. So unpopular became the institution that none but the Craw-
ford men would attend, and when in February, 1824, the last republican
caucus that was to meet was called to order, only 66 of the 216 re-
publicans in congress were present. Of these, all but four voted for
Crawford. In the attack on the caucus, the friends of Jackson, who
was hailed as the people's candidate, were most active.
The campaign of 1824, like its two predecessors, was conducted on
personal grounds. This does not mean that principles were then un-
known, but that on the leading principles under discussion, tariff and
internal improvements, the candidates were practically of the same
CLAY AS PRESIDENT-MAKER 379
opinion. Clay was the peculiar champion of the tariff, but neither
of the others opposed it. Calhoun was preeminently for internal im-
provements, but all the others mildly favored them. Crawford's
friends in the South talked about his devotion to the
"principles of 1798," the doctrines of strict reconstruction ;
but national measures were so popular that they dare not
press the point. Some Southerners wished to raise the question of
Adams's attitude on the Missouri question, but he replied that he was
for conciliation. In fact, no one dared bring up this point, since it
would injure a Southern candidate in the North as much as a North-
ern candidate in the South. As the only Northern candidate, Adams
got the vote of that large portion of the inhabitants of his section who
resented the Virginia domination. He was not personally popular
there, spite of his many excellent qualities.
No one awaited the election returns more impatiently than Clay.
In 1823 he was triumphantly reflected speaker, and if the election
went to the house and he were one of the three highest,
his popularity in that body would give him excellent pros- 5jlaT a
pects. His fate hung on the action of Louisiana and New candMate.
York. In the former state he had a majority of the
legislature, which chose the electors, but a vote was taken when three
of his friends were absent, and the Jackson and Adams
men combined and carried the day. In New York the The Result
legislature also had the choice, and by skillful manipula- voting,
tion three of the men chosen as Clay men voted at last
for his opponents. A loser at these two points, he got only 37
votes, while Crawford got 41, Adams 84, and Jackson 99. His nar-
row failure to fall among the lucky three was partly atoned for by the
knowledge that in the field into which the contest was now com-
mitted he would be the arbiter between his rivals.
THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION or 1825
Both judgment and interest showed Clay the way he should lean.
Crawford, incapacitated through health, was out of the question, and
the choice was between the other two. Adams was an
educated man, Jackson's training was chiefly obtained from
frontier conditions. Adams was experienced in public
affairs at home and abroad, Jackson was a good fighter and a passable
head of a military district, but his temper was violent, he could not
make a speech, and in his only administrative office, governorship of
Florida, he had, through lack of ordinary tact, allowed affairs to get
into a most unnecessary muddle. Between two such men, who could
hesitate who had the interest of the country at heart? Moreover,
Clay's future interests pointed to Adams, who was really unpopular
in the North and would hardly be able to perpetuate his leadership
380 THE LAST OF THE VIRGINIA DYNASTY
more than four years. In the readjustment of parties, which was
inevitable, it was more likely that the older states of the North would
unite with Clay, popular in the Northwest, than with Jackson, popular
in the Southwest. Clay was now the most outspoken champion of
the tariff. Was it not more natural for him to expect support in the
North, where the manufactures were rapidly increasing, than in the
South, where they could not hope to succeed ? All these arguments
were urged upon him by the friends of Adams, from the time congress
met early in December. He seems to have made up his mind from that
time, but he said nothing. Meanwhile the friends of Jackson besought
him to favor their candidate as a Western man and as the candidate
who had the highest number of votes in the recent election. To all
their appeals he gave good-humored attention, but was careful to
promise nothing.
The number of states was then twenty-four, and the successful candi-
date must have a majority, or thirteen. Crawford had four states
without dispute, Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, and Delaware,
the heart of the old Virginia group. Adams had seven,
New England and Maryland, the old federalist strong-
hold. Jackson had Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi,
representing the new Southwest, South Carolina, a result of his coopera-
tion with Calhoun, and Pennsylvania and New Jersey, which he and
Calhoun had wrung from the ancient combination. This group
was rather incongruous, and had no other common bond than its
opposition to the Virginia school, from which its component parts
had formerly received little recognition. Jackson also had Indiana,
for local reasons, which gave him a total of seven. Of the other six
Clay was able to control four, — Kentucky, Ohio, Missouri, and Louisi-
ana. Illinois, with only one representative, hung for a time in the
balance, and then came over to Adams, who, with Clay's four, now had
twelve states, and lacked only one of a majority ; and that one was
New York, whose delegation in the house was badly divided.
Half of New York's delegation were for Adams, the rest for Jackson
and Crawford. The leader of the Crawford men was Van Buren,
then a senator. He hoped the state's vote would remain
divided on the first. ballot- T.hus there would be no choice
Election. on tnat ballot, which would give him opportunity at a later
time to cast the New York vote for Adams and secure
for himself the honor of president-maker. It was a shrewd scheme,
and if successful, would have lessened Clay's prestige. But at the
last moment one of Crawford's New York supporters, General Van
Rensselaer, changed to Adams, which gave that state to the New
Englander and made him president on the first ballot. Much seems
to have depended on this action ; for if Van Buren could have delivered
the Crawford group to Adams, they must have supported his admin-
istration for a while, possibly for a long time. As it was, they
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 38z
remained unattached for a year, and then joined the opposition. In
1828 they were, under Van Buren's leadership, an important element
of the party which followed Jackson.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The general works on the period covered in this chapter are the Histories by
McMaster, Schouler, and Wilson (see page 312) ; Babcock, Rise of American Nation-
ality (iqo6); Turner, Rise of the New West (igo6), the chapters on social develop-
ment are especially good; Burgess, The Middle Period (1897), the outline is good;
Stanwood, History of the Presidency (1898) ; Hart, American History told by Con-
temporaries, vol. Ill (1906) ; and The Cambridge Modern History, vol. VII (1903).
Perkins, Historical Sketches of the United States, 1815-1830 (1830), is a reliable con-
temporary work, but it is scarce. Besides the biographies and writings of Jefferson,
Madison, Monroe, and King (see page 275), and those of John Quincy Adams, Clay,
and Wirt (see page 312), much assistance can be had from Bassett, Life of Andrew
Jackson, 2 vols. (1911); Parton, Life of Andrew Jackson, 3 vols. (1860); Meigs,
Life of Benton (1904) ; Hunt, Life of Calhoun (1907) ; Works of Calhoun, 6 vols.
(1853-1855) ; Letters of Calhoun (Jameson, ed., 1899) ; and Shipp, Life of W. H.
Crawford (1909). The legislative and executive sources are the same as for the
preceding chapter. N ties' Weekly Register (1811-1849) and The North American
Review (1815-) are the important periodicals for the period.
The Bank of the United States. Catterall, The Second Bank of the United States
(1903), contains a good bibliography ; Clark and Hall, Legislative and Documentary
History of the Bank of the United States (1832) ; Sumner, History of Banking in all
Nations, 4 vols. (1896), volume I deals with banks in the United States; Mac-
Donald, Select Documents (1907), No. 33 presents the charter of the bank.
The Missouri Compromise. Woodburn, Historical Significance of the Missouri
Compromise (American Hist. Association Report, 1893), is the best narrative treat-
ment. The debates are in Annals of Congress for 1819, 1820, and 1821. The bill
with the important amendments is in MacDonald, Select Documents (1907).
The background of the incident is in Carr, Missouri (1888), but the treatment leaves
much to be desired. An interesting view of the life in early Missouri can be had
from Flint, Condensed History and Geography of the W-estern States, 2 vols. (1828), and
History and Geography of the Mississippi Valley, 2 vols. (1832).
The Monroe Doctrine. Reddaway, The Monroe Doctrine (1898 and 1906), very
good ; Ford, John Quincy Adams, his Connection with the Monroe Doctrine (Mass.
Hist. Soc. Proceedings, 1902) ; Rush, Memoranda of a Residence at the Court of
London from 1819 to 1825 (1845). For the British side see Stapleton, Political Life
of George Canning, 3 vols. (1831); Official Correspondence of George Canning, 2
vols. (1887). For the Spanish American revolt and its relations to the United States
see: Paxson, The Independence of the South American Republics (1903); Latane",
Diplomatic Relations of the United States and South America (1900) ; Callahan, Cuba
and International Relations (1899). For a less detailed treatment see Hart, Foun-
dations of American Foreign Policy (1901) ; and Moore, Digest of International Law,
5 vols. (1906). The Official Correspondence is in American State Papers, Foreign
A/airs, vol. V. Oilman, Life of James Monroe (1883), has a bibliography by J.
Franklin Jameson.
For Independent Reading
Mrs. Smith, The First Forty Years of Washington Society (1906) ; Chittenden,
The American Fur Trade of the Far West, 3 vols. (1902) ; Drake, Making of the Great
West (1884) ; Schurz, Life of Henry Clay, 2 vols. (1887) ; Quincy, Figures of the
Past (1883) ; Cobbett, A Year's Residence in the United States (1818-1819).
CHAPTER XVIII
THE ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
PARTY FORMATION UNDER JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
ADAMS'S first action was to make Clay secretary of state ; notice
that henceforth the two men would act together. The Jackson-
Calhoun group, resenting the coalition which had defeated
Adam^ tne*r ^ea<^er' began a violent opposition. They voted
Unite. against the confirmation of Clay, and returned to their
homes full of scorn at what they proclaimed a corrupt
bargain to obtain the presidency. The mass of people, to whom Jack-
son was a hero, believed the charge and began to look to the day of
vindication. Meanwhile, it was evident that Crawford's health
would not be reestablished, and there was much anxiety about the
future conduct of his followers. Van Buren was their
leader, and was in close relation with the Virginians and the
Off. Georgian, who spoke for the Southern half of the group.
Had they divided, he might have gone for Adams, but it
was decided that both sections should act together.
For leadership the group now looked to Van Buren, and for a year
he gave no intimation of what he would do. Then came Adams's
first annual message, a strongly national document. It
F<damlif advocated internal improvements and a generally paternal
muaMes- attitude of the government in many measures to promote
sage. the common welfare. It was as gall to the old republicans,
who, strong in the Virginia faith, had gone with Crawford.
Until that time Van Buren had coquetted with the Adams party:
if he had continued that course, he would have had no
Crawford- following outside his own state. He now shifted position,
Jackson! an<^ before the winter of 1825-1826 was over was aiding
the Jackson men in their onslaught on the president.
Van Buren's accession to the Jackson party was welcome, for dis-
sension was already beginning between the Tennesseeans and the
South Carolinians. Calhoun was an experienced public
and Gal*611 man> Jackson was inexperienced. It angered the followers
houn. °f the latter to hear it said that Calhoun's wisdom would
have to save the party. It seemed to them that the
junior partner was seeking to assume the functions of the senior.
Now Van Buren was as skillful a leader as Calhoun, and not so self-
382
BREAKING DOWN ADAMS 383
assertive. From the time he became a Jackson man he was in close
association with the peculiarly Jackson group, and thenceforth the
party contained a factional conflict which only the necessity of meeting
a common danger kept within bounds.
Until 1829 all factions acted together in the bitterest warfare on
Adams. He was an honest and able president, but he and his secre-
tary must be broken down. The first occasion was the
annual message, in which Adams gave forth his national
program. Jefferson had thought the government's func- Adams.
tions should be few, and much should be left to individual
initiative. Adams frankly announced another policy. Government,
he said, should seek to improve the condition of the citizens. Roads
and canals should be built, a national university should be founded,
scientific discoveries should be promoted, distant seas should be
explored, and observatories, "light-houses of the skies," should be
established. All this was recommended in an academic sense. There
was also high praise for internal improvements and for a nationally
organized militia. On these features of the message the opposition
fell furiously. Did they not show, it was said, that Adams was mad
for concentration? The echoes of the attack were heard in every
part of the country, the state rights men leading the van.
Immediately came a specific measure on which the opposition could
rally. Bolivar, leader of the South American revolutionists, had
conceived a plan for a congress of delegates from the new
states north and south of the Isthmus of Panama, and in phe
the spring of 1825 Clay was asked if the United States congress,
would accept an invitation to attend. The object of the
meeting was not clearly stated, but Clay saw in it an opportunity
to extend American influence, and favored an acceptance. Adams
was more cautious, and i-t was decided to ask for more definite informa-
tion about the objects of the meeting. In the autumn came formal
invitations to attend a congress at Panama. They came from
Mexico, Guatemala, and Colombia, and named as objects of considera-
tion resistance to the attempts of European powers to interfere in
America, the recognition of Hayti, the regulation of the slave trade,
and the formation of an American league to offset the continental
alliance in the Old World. This announcement seems hardly candid ;
for the Colombian official press declared that the object of the congress
was to form a league to oppose Spain, to liberate Cuba and Porto Rico,
and to execute the Monroe Doctrine. Clay's imagination was warm
and his diplomacy was aggressive. He welcomed the opportunity to
extend the commercial and political interests of his country, and he
carried the more cautious Adams with him. Accordingly, a special
message went from the president to congress, December 26, announcing
the nomination of delegates and asking that appropriations be made
to pay their expenses. It disclaimed an intention to incur obligations
384 THE ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
of a belligerent kind or to enter into a league of defense with the
states represented at the congress, but it left badly denned the
objects proposed for consideration.
Then came an excited debate. The Jackson group questioned
the constitutionality of the president's action, said he made too much
of Monroe's recently announced Doctrine, and pointed
Attitude of OU£ ^at dire disaster awaited the slave states if the nation
Men.a° participated in a congress in which sat representatives of
the black republic of Hayti and at which plans would be
made to free Cuba and Porto Rico from Spain and from the regime of
slavery. The last argument was far-fetched, but it appealed to the
South. It amounted to saying that if the government gave its coun-
tenance to the movement for emancipation in the Spanish American
communities, it would thereby weaken the cause of slavery in the
South, and that this was an interference with local institutions. Such
reasoning could only have been intended to arouse the Southerners
against the administration. It had little effect in congress. The
senate confirmed the nominations and the house after a hot debate
voted the money for expenses. At last the representatives set out for
the isthmus, but the debates in congress had so delayed them that it
was summer, 1826, before they departed. One of them died on the
way, and the other arrived to find that the congress, after a fruitless
session, had adjourned, to meet again at Tacubaya. He lingered until
the appointed day, but when it arrived internal commotions reigned,
and the congress did not assemble.
As to political significance the Panama incident was important.
It furnished a rallying point for the "friends of Jackson," and their
strength is shown by the votes of 24 to 19 in the senate and
I34 to 6o in the house- Van Buren is said to have re-
cident. marked: "If they had only taken the other side and
refused the mission, we should have had them." The
debate, through the use made by the Jackson men of the slavery
argument, tended to bring all the old Virginia following in the South
into one alliance with the Tennesseean at the head.
THE TARIFF AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF SECTIONALISM
In 1816 the South accepted the protective tariff, but it soon had
reason to regret it. The westward migration injured all the old
Atlantic states, north and south ; but in New England the
Effects of loss was balanced by the growth of manufactures. In
«elariff; the South was no such compensatory process, and land
South] and values fell steadily. The steady fall in the price of cotton
West.' through the rapid extension of its area of cultivation in the
Gulf region increased the suffering. Then arose a Southern
cry that it was all due to the evident inequality of the tariff, which
PROGRESS OF THE TARIFF 385
built up the North at the expense of the parts in which the people had
no manufactures, but paid ever higher prices for their supplies. The
West was in the same position logically, but it did not feel the burden
in the same way. In the first place the continued improvement in
transportation tended to lower prices of supplies, while land values
naturally rose with the increase of population, and thus the burden
was not apparent. Besides this, the prevalent idea in the West was
confidence in the future of America. Imagination was keen on the
subject, and the people readily adopted the theory of the home market.
Let us have manufactures to develop our own cities, which will
purchase our own raw product, said Clay, in announcing his famous
" American System," and the idea found ready popular response.
Add to this the fact that the protectionists wove into their system
protective rates for raw wool and hemp, articles produced by the
Western farmers, and we shall see why the Western farmers tolerated
a system which their Southern brethren thought unjust.
In 1819 occurred a severe panic. A period of prosperity and
feverish speculation followed the war of 1812, credit was
expanded, and the inevitable collapse came surely. Now Growing
arose a cry of hard times. Banks were embarrassed,
agricultural products sold at lower prices, labor was ists.
unemployed, and manufacturers suffered from competition
with foreign goods produced at stagnation prices. Then arose a
demand for further tariff legislation, and the result was the tariff bill
of 1820. It provided for an increase in most of the schedules, espe-
cially in those on woollens, cotton goods, iron, and hemp. It passed
the house, but failed in the senate by one vote. In the former body
it received all the votes from the Northwest, and all but one from
the Middle states. All but five of the votes from the older South were
against it and all but four of those from the Southwest, including
Kentucky. The parts of New England which represented the older
commercial and farming interests were against it, while those which
favored the manufacturers were for it. Thus, the agricultural South
and Southwest and the commercial and agricultural parts of the
Northeast were opposed to protection, and the manufacturing and
agricultural Middle states and the Northwest were for it. Defeated
by so close a vote, it was inevitable that the measure should come up
again.
Several attempts to take up the tariff followed the bill of 1820, but
none succeeded until 1824, when an act was carried through the house
by a vote of 107 to 105 and through the senate by a vote
of 25 to 21. It did not' pro vide as high duties as those of of Ig24
the defeated bill of 1820. By raising the rates on hemp it
got the entire vote of Kentucky, and it had the solid support of the
Northwest, whose growth in population gave the protectionists a con-
siderable advantage as compared with the former vote. It also raised
2C
386 THE ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
the duty on raw wool, which was largely produced in the Northwest.
Here again was seen a strong opposition in the South and Southwest,
and New England was again divided, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
and Maine casting in opposition 22 of their 25 votes in the house. In
these states the commercial interests were in political control, and
Webster, voicing their wishes, made an excellent speech against the
bill. Every vote of the Northwest and of Kentucky was in the affirm-
ative and every vote of the South and the Southwest, except three
from Maryland, one from Virginia, and two from Tennessee, was in
the negative. Save for New England, the tariff had become a sec-
tional issue.
The bill of 1824 was a compromise, and the protectionists were
resolved to make another effort. In 1827 a woollens bill was intro-
duced, raising the rates on both the manufactured article
and the raw product. It passed the house, but was
1827.° defeated in the seriate by the casting vote of Calhoun, the
vice-president. But the manufacturers did not lose heart.
In the summer of the same year they held at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania,
a great convention, at which it was agreed to frame a bill in which all
interests were represented and to try to induce congress to pass it.
Meanwhile, the press teemed with arguments for and against protec-
tion, and feeling became high.
Such was the situation when congress met in December, 1827, the
Jackson party in control in the house. Divided nearly equally
between friends and opponents of the tariff, they must
suffer severely did not some astute politician devise a
plan of escape. Keeping their leader in the background,
they prepared in committee a bill which should be objectionable to
New England but satisfactory to the Middle states. It lowered the
rates on the medium priced woollens and raised them on molasses and
articles used in ship building, all of which injured New England
interests ; and if Adams approved, as he must do or lose the support
of the Middle states, he would suffer in his own section. It was ex-
pected that efforts would be made to amend, and all the Jackson men,
Northern and Southern, agreed to reject amendments and force the
bill to a vote as it came from committee. They kept their agreement,
spite of the bitter jibes of the New Englanders. But at last the
unexpected happened: enough New Englanders voted "aye" to
pass the bill with the support of the Jackson men of the North and
the high tariff men of the North and Northwest. The result left Jack-
son untouched by unpopularity. His Northern friends could point
to their votes to show that they favored the 'tariff, and his Southern
friends could point to their solid vote against it to show that they had
fought ably to defeat it. John Randolph pointedly said that the bill
"referred to manufactures of no sort or kind, but the manufacture of a
President of the United States." But it was an unfair measure, and
THE TARIFF AND NULLIFICATION 387
was popularly called "the tariff of abominations." In the senate the
woollen schedule was increased, and this secured better recognition
from New England. Webster, now a senator from Massachusetts,
voted for the bill, announcing that manufactures had progressed so
far in his section that protection was henceforth its chief interest.
It was a correct assertion. The long opposition between commerce
and manufactures in New England was at an end, and the latter had
triumphed. This last stronghold of antitariff sentiment in the North
had surrendered. The tariff was now wholly a sectional policy.
This meant that the South had lost. Every one expected that the
fight would soon be renewed, and her leaders were actively engaged
in formulating an opposition which would stay the victors
in what was then considered a selfish and unequal policy. South
In this process Virginia took an attitude of inactivity. J
Not herself a cotton-raising state, and lacking very able southern
leaders, she allowed the more positive South Carolinians Leadership,
to take the initiative. From that time the cotton states
dominated the Southern policy, and Calhoun, who was soon to be at
odds with Jackson, became its spokesman.
The weapon with which South Carolina proposed to secure success
was nullification, as the event showed, too extreme a measure to com-
mand the support even of the South. Its inception goes
back to the Crawford faction in the state, committed to
state rights and hostile to the national policy of Calhoun. tion
They became outspoken with the enactment of the tariff
of 1824 and held many vehement meetings of protest. They gave
their cause a constitutional bias, declaring that neither protection nor
internal improvements were justified by the fundamental law. Cal-
houn saw the growing feeling with alarm. He must join, or fight it.
He did not hesitate long. By defeating the woollens bill of 1827 he
indicated his preference for the support of his own state, while he lost
that of the North. In this year appeared "The Crisis," a series of
letters by Turnbull, an extreme state rights man, counselling that
'South Carolina should "resist oppression." He did not say how this
should be done, but the inference is that he wished her to use force.
In the same spirit were many of his fellow citizens, but they objected
to using force. A more pacific way was suggested by Calhoun, who
in 1828 wrote a paper which came to be known as "The South Carolina
Exposition." It was prepared at the request of the state rights party
and was submitted to the legislature as the report of a committee on
relations with the federal government. Calhoun's authorship was
not revealed at the time, but it was suspected.
"The Exposition" harked back to the Virginia and Kentucky
Resolutions, 1798. It declared: (i) that the union was a compact of
equal states ; (2) that the federal government, created by the states,
was their agent to carry out what it had been commissioned to do ;
388 THE ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
(3) that the constitution was its body of instructions ; (4) that the
action of the agent was null when it violated the instruction ; and
(5) that it was for the state to determine when the in-
Numfica°f structions were violated. Applying this doctrine, it was
tion held that the protective tariff was not authorized in the con-
stitution, and that South Carolina, a sovereign state, might
lawfully and without incurring any serious penalty resist its execution
within her borders. This declaration was not adopted by the legis-
lature, but it was widely published, and found ready acceptance by a
people exasperated by the steady increase of a species of taxation which
awarded to South Carolina none of its advantages and all of its
burdens. To put it into practice was to reduce the national authority
to a nullity. Calhoun well knew this, but he thought that the prin-
ciple once granted, congress would never make laws which would
furnish the opportunity to put the theory into force. If it was said
that the,states could not be trusted to exercise nullification moderately,
the reply was that supreme authority was with the state and that it
was as reasonable to trust the state to use it moderately as the federal
government, which the nationalists wished to make supreme.
Having formulated this doctrine, the South Carolinians rested on
their oars, for the necessity for putting it into operation was not
immediately apparent. They looked to the approaching
No Inter- election with much confidence ; for was not Jackson, the
tempt at At' probable victor, a Southern man and a cotton planter?
Execution, and was not Calhoun, ranking second in his party, the
highest defender of nullification ? And if the election were
favorable, might not all come right without an open contest ?
THE ELECTION OF 1828
In 1825 many men thought that the candidacy of Jackson was a
bit of enthusiasm which would subside with his defeat. The union
of his own and Calhoun's followers with those of Crawford
soon showed they were mistaken. It was a strong com-
bination, and kept a united front to its enemy, spite of the
slumbering internal feud. Jackson proved a good leader. He was
impetuous by temperament, his career was filled with quarrels, and
his foes hoped and his friends feared he would commit some deed
of anger which would overwhelm him in disgrace. But Jackson in
the pursuit of his own affairs and Jackson as a national figure were
distinct personalities. Though he chafed inwardly at the attacks
showered on him, he was outwardly calm and dignified. In their hope
of arousing him, the enemy went so far as to charge that his marriage
was contracted at the expense of the happiness of another home. In
other times this would have brought from him the fiercest denuncia-
tion, but he realized the tactics behind the charge and left the task
CHARGES AGAINST ADAMS 389
of dispelling the calumny to his friends. He had married a divorced
wife, but was in no sense the cause of her separation from her husband.
Thus he came to the end of his campaign without misadventure of the
kind expected. To his supporters he was an abused man, a great and
good defender of his country, an upright citizen, and the champion of
the people against an aristocracy indifferent to the welfare of the
people.
Besides his own popularity, the voters were influenced by three
kinds of arguments directed to them by the vigorous Jackson leaders :
i. The first was the bargain and corruption cry. No
dispassionate man objected to whatever understanding *J
may have been made between Adams and Clay in the
winter of 1824-1825, but to the people at large it had enough support
in fact to make it appear that very wicked things were going on at
Washington, where, as they thought, politicians sold the offices for
their own advantage. 2. It was -urged that the rights of the states
were jeopardized by the centralizing policy of a New Eng-
land president, an argument which appealed strongly to
the old Jeffersonian school. To support it was Adams's
first annual message, as well as the demand for internal improvements
and for a high tariff. Was it not time, said the objectors, to check a
process which, if continued, would eventually place the national
government in the hands of a selfish majority to tyrannize over the
minority ?
3. Another plan of attack was to accuse Adams of abusing the
patronage. The charge was unfounded, for no president had been
less inclined to appoint men for his own advantage. He
was rigidly honest, and lost support by refusing to appoint
men because they worked for his reelection. One of them
expressed his disgust by telling him to his face that he might be right
but he would not be reflected. Yet Adams persisted, even retaining
in his confidence McLean, a Calhoun supporter, who as postmaster-
general used his large patronage in the interest of the opposition. In
truth, the opinion of the country ran strongly for political appoint-
ments. Political leaders would not work in the election if they did
not have assurance of reward. Edward Everett expressed the feel-
ing of every shrewd observer when he said in 1828 : "For an Admin-
istration then to bestow its patronage, without distinction of party, is
to court its own destruction." Thus, while Adams lost the support
of his own friends, he was charged with abusing the patronage, and
the country came to believe that the cause of good government de-
manded that a party be placed in power which, as one Jackson man
expressed it, would " cleanse the Augean stables."
Arguments like these pleased the mass of citizens. The government
had long been based on the idea that the best men should be chosen
to represent the people. The Jackson leaders declared that the
3QO THE ADMINISTRATION OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS
representatives had ceased to act as upright agents. They declared
that the remedy v»as to replace the old leaders by others closely
responsive to the popular will. So far as they utilized the Crawford
and Calhoun organizations they had trained leaders ; but here, as in
the formation of all new parties, they had many others who had little
experience in politics, men of vehement prejudices and radical ideas.
Such was the earliest composition of the Jacksonian democracy.
On the other side were ranged the forces of conservatism. The
commercial classes, the manufacturers generally in the Middle states,
the city people, and the larger landowners, had little sym-
Party. * pathy with the cause of a Western military hero in whose
name class was set against class. With them worked the
followers of Clay, strongest in the Northwest, and the Adams men,
strongest in New England, whose instincts likewise were for conserva-
tive policies. Adams was their logical candidate for the presidency,
and Richard Rush, of Pennsylvania, ran with him for the vice-presi-
dency. For the second place the Jackson men supported Calhoun.
As the campaign progressed, it was evident that Jackson's prospects
were good. Adams had New England, but hardly anything else. Not
even Clay's influence could carry the West for him against
Election. suc^ a P0?^3-1" nero as Jackson. The South stood together,
and with it went Pennsylvania, destined for many years to
be a democratic stronghold. In New York the commercial class
favored Adams, but the farmers of the interior, marshaled by the
skillful Van Buren, were for Jackson. They were rent in twain, how-
ever, by the antimasonic movement, and not even Van Buren could
promise a solid Jackson vote from the state. Of its 36 votes, as it fell
out, 1 6 went for Adams and the rest for Jackson. Thus was revived
under the leadership of Jackson that old combination of the South
and the great Central states under which the Virginia regime was long
in power. The total vote was 178 for Jackson and 83 for Adams.
The latter got every New England vote but one in Maine, with 6 in
Maryland, 8 in New Jersey, 3 in Delaware, and 16 in New York. He
had none from the region south of the Potomac and west of the
Alleghanies. The result was the defeat of one of the most conscien-
tious of presidents because he could not withstand the tide of popular
government then running strong, a movement much like that which
carried his father and the federalist party to destruction in 1800.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The general works and sources continue as for chapter XVII ; and the same is true
of biographies of leading men, to which add Jervey, Life of Robert Y. Hayne (1909).
The political history of Adams's administration is treated in Turner, Rise of the
New West (1906) ; McMaster, History of the People of the United States, vol. V
(1900) ; and Bassett, Life of Andrew Jackson, vol. II (1911).
On the growth of the state rights feeling see Hunt, Life of Calhoun (1907) ;
Phillfps, Georgia and State Rights (Am. Hist. Assn. Report, 1901, vol. II) ; Ames, State
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 391
Documents on Federal Relations, Nos. 3-5 (1900-1905) ; Houston, Nullification in
South Carolina (Harvard Hist. Studies, 1893) ; Brown, The Lower South in American
History (1902), a most suggestive essay; Calhoun, The South Carolina Exposi-
tion (Works, vol. VI, 1854) ; and Jervey, Life of Robert Y. Hayne (1909).
On the tariff a work favorable to the protectionists is Stan wood, American
Tariff Controversies, 2 vols. (1903) ; and on the opposite side Taussig, Tariff History
of the United States (1893, new ed. 1900). The memorials from the manufactures
and others are in American State Papers, Finance, vols. III-V. See also Niles,
Weekly Register for the years involved.
For Independent Reading
Morse, John Quincy Adams (1882) ; McMaster, Daniel Webster (1902) ; Bassett,
Life of Andrew Jackson, 2 vols. (1911); Brown, The Lower South in American
History (1902); and Shepard, Van Buren (1892).
CHAPTER XIX
PROBLEMS OF JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
THE NEW PRESIDENT IN CHARGE
MARCH 4, 1829, Washington was filled with visitors come to see the
" people's champion " take the oath of office. They covered the slopes
of Capitol Hill from where the peace monument now
Inaugura- stands to the crest, where a picket fence inclosed the open
Jackson. square which now separates the capitol from the library
of congress. Within this yard another great crowd
awaited the inaugural ceremony from the east portico. Just before
noon the watchers on the slope saw a knot of gentlemen issue from a
hotel on the avenue and move slowly up the hill. In the midst walked
Jackson, bareheaded, tall and erect, his white hair conspicuous above
the shoulders of his companions. A few minutes later he had entered
the building, and in a short time stood before the great crowd in the
inclosure and took the oath which John Marshall administered.
Then came an inaugural address, safely scanned beforehand by his
advisers, lest it say something which would give the carping opposi-
tion an opportunity to upbraid him. All went well. The spectacle
was so impressive that Francis Scott Key, who stood at a gate of the
picket fence, exclaimed: "It is beautiful, it is sublime !" The oath
taken, the president mounted his horse and rode to the White House,
where a reception was tendered to any one who chose to come.
Now followed a saturnalia. Statesmen and stable-boys, fine ladies
and washerwomen, white people and blacks, all pushed into the
mansion, grasped the hand of the president, if they could
The R seep- reacj1 fam^ an(j mshed upon the waiters serving refresh-
ments. From the rabble he was glad to escape by a side
door, but the jostling crowd surged through the rooms, upsetting the
trays in the hands of the servants, breaking the dishes, and leaping on
the furniture in their eagerness to be served, until at last they were
turned aside by some thoughtful person who had tubs of punch carried
to the lawns, whither the mob quickly followed. Thus was inaugu-
rated the rule of the democracy.
The cabinet was already announced. At the head was
Cabinet ^an Buren> secretary of state, whom most persons thought
an excellent selection. The others were nearly evenly
divided between his own followers and the friends of Calhoun. They
had all been selected after much conference between .the two factions,
392
DEMOCRACY AT THE HELM 393
and it seems that Jackson had been forced to submit to such a
choice. The fact shows how far the party had come to be a defi-
nite organization, of which the president was only the leader.
There was much disappointment, especially among the Virginians,
whose state, save for a short time in Madison's presidency, had
always had a seat in the cabinet since the beginning of the govern-
ment. Not another Virginian was to sit there until the ill-starred
administration of Tyler, himself a Virginian. The disappointed ones
made the best they could of the situation, and some of them were
later consoled with high diplomatic appointments.
This cabinet was not to be a body of political advisers. The
members who supported Calhoun had not the president's confidence
to the same extent as Van Buren, Eaton, and Barry, the
inefficient postmaster-general. These men, with W. B. ™£
Lewis, F. P. Blair, J. A. Hamilton, A. J. Donelson, cabinet"
and some others, established such superior influence
that they were dubbed the "Kitchen Cabinet." They consti-
tuted a private cabal in the interest of Van Buren. Flatterers
and others who sought favors secured its influence. It was the
real council of the anti-Calhoun faction until the reorganiza-
tion of the cabinet in 1831 enabled the president to have a cab-
inet in which no Calhounite had place. With that change he
consulted his regular advisers more freely, and the " Kitchen
Cabinet" lost its importance.
Among the inauguration visitors were a vast number of office
seekers. The impression that Adams officials would be removed was
general, and every Jackson man who could do so was
present with petitions for reward for party service. Jack-
son was little inclined to resent the pressure brought to
bear upon him. He announced frankly his belief in rotation in office,
saying that one honest citizen was as capable as another of serving
the public. He believed the campaign charges that the old officials
were largely incompetent or touched with partisanship. It must be
remembered that the old method of selecting officials was by personal
recommendation, that many old men were in office who were no longer
able to do the duty assigned to them, which facts gave some basis for
the desire to adopt a new system. The treasury, we are told, was
popularly called by residents of Washington " the octogenarian depart-
ment." The removals which followed the inauguration were many
more than had occurred before that time, but not so many as were
made by later presidents. Most of Jackson's appointees were inex-
perienced men, many of them were incompetent, and a few proved
dishonest. The system he inaugurated had previously grown up in
several states, notably in New York. It was characterized by Marcy,
of New York, in the phrase, later generally adopted, " To the victors
belong the spoils! "
394 JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
The selection of one member of the cabinet brought out an unex-
pected protest. Senator John H. Eaton, of Tennessee, a staunch
friend of Jackson's, was made secretary of war. January i,
Eaton 1829, he was married to Mrs. Timberlake, daughter of a
Washington tavern-keeper, who was reported to have had
many adventures, a woman whom the society of the city would not
receive. Remonstrances were made to Jackson against bringing into
his official family one who would undoubtedly be rejected socially.
He believed her innocent, and refused to discriminate against her,
saying he came to Washington to make a cabinet in the interest of
the country and not to please the ladies of the capital. Trouble began
immediately, but as official entertainments were not held until society
returned to Washington after the summer season was past, an open
break was deferred until the fall. Then Jackson gave a dinner, to
which all the invited ones came. But their restrained looks showed
their feelings toward Mrs. Eaton. When other cabinet officers
gave dinners, some members refused to attend. At other places Mrs.
Eaton was treated so coolly that before the end of the winter she ceased
to accept invitations. Jackson was deeply offended. He took the
conduct of society as an affront to himself. He thought a combina-
tion was made to discredit his administration.
So far, this was only a social affair, but it soon assumed a political
aspect. Van Buren was a widower. He had no family to object
to Mrs. Eaton, and won the regard of the president by
Political conspicuous attentions to her on every possible occasion.
of^the1" ' Of those who took the opposite course, Mrs. Calhoun was
Matter. the leader, and she was supported by the wives of several
other cabinet members. Thus Jackson came to associate
the vice-president with what he called the conspiracy, and he drew
nearer to the friends of Van Buren. He called the protesting cabinet
members before him and told them he expected them to induce their
wives to treat more courteously the wife of his friend. The only
reply they made was that they could not interfere with the social
affairs of their families. There was no improvement in the situation of
the unhappy woman, and the breach in the administration party grew
steadily wider.
INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS CHECKED
While this affair progressed, Van Buren was able to give his rival
another deadly thrust by bringing the president over to the opposi-
tion to internal improvements, whose champion Calhoun
Calhoun hacl long been. The vice-president was the author of the
bonus bi.U> l8l7 (see PaSe 365)' which. Madison vetoed
on constitutional grounds. But the friends of improve-
ments persisted, and in 1819 passed resolutions calling
on the secretary of war, Calhoun, to report on the roads necessary for
THE MAYSVILLE VETO 395
military defense. The secretary complied, but his comprehensive
scheme was not acted upon. However, so many appropriations were
made for single works that Monroe, himself a strict constructionist,
decided to give the country another warning like that of Madison.
Accordingly he vetoed, in 1822, a bill to establish toll-gates on, and
otherwise to regulate, the Cumberland road, a great national highway
designed to run from the Potomac to the capital of Missouri, then the
westernmost state. Jackson was at that time in private life, but he
wrote to Monroe, congratulating him on the veto. In 1824 a bill was
passed directing the secretary of war to have made surveys of such
roads and canals as were needed for national development. Next
year Calhoun reported a system of roads and canals, the chief features
of which were: (i) a canal from the Potomac to the Ohio, to be
extended finally to Lake Erie, (2) an inland waterway along the coast
from the Potomac to Boston harbor, and (3) a national highway from
New Orleans to Washington. Besides these works he pointed out
others which ought to be undertaken, some in the South, and some in
the West. To the opponents of improvements it seemed a bid for the
support of all the parts of the country which would be affected.
Nothing was done to carry out this scheme while Adams was president,
but it was still in the minds of men at the accession of Jackson. The
large group who favored it, strong especially in the Middle and North-
western states, looked to Calhoun, second in the party and probable
successor in 1832, to carry it out. If the weight of Jackson's opposi-
tion could be aroused, it would weaken the scheme and at the same
time deal a hard blow to the hopes of Calhoun.
Van Buren was the daily companion of the president. He was not
a great statesman, but he had tact and common sense, and Jackson,
who knew little about practical administration, asked
his advice continually. The two men talked freely about
the dangers they believed to exist in the growing tendency
to get congress to vote money for roads and canals which
were purely local, and it was decided that at the first good opportu-
nity a veto should be given which would again call attention to the evils
in the practice. Soon afterwards a bill was introduced to authorize
the government to take stock in a road from Maysville, Kentucky,
to Lexington, in the same state. The road was purely local, and a
veto of it could be easily defended. Its passage through the two
houses was carefully watched from the White House, and the veto
was duly sent May 27, 1830. Many of the president's best friends
feared the consequences, saying that it would alienate Pennsylvania
and the West. He replied that it was only the contractors and land-
boomers, with the politicians who feared them, that opposed the veto,
and that the people at large would approve the measure. The news
from the people confirmed this foresight. The Maysville veto proved
one of the popular measures of Jackson's career. In delivering it he
396 JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
showed one of his most characteristic traits, his ability to divine what
the people wished and his willingness to appeal to them over the heads
of the politicians.
After rejecting the Maysville bill Jackson objected to many similar
measures. He effectively checked appropriations for roads in the
states, although many were built in the territories. He
Later His- fad not make the same objection to appropriations for
ternai im- improving rivers and harbors, destined to be for many
provements. years the congressman's means of getting benefits for his
district. The veto came just when railroads were coming
into use, the burden of constructing them was transferred to the
states, which made, in the next generation, lavish gifts to such enter-
prises. The rage for railroad construction at state expense led to much
extravagance in the West and was a vital cause of the panic of 1837.
After 1850 the Jackson policy was reversed, when great land grants
began to be made for the construction of railroads, the most important
being the grants in aid of the transcontinental roads during the civil
war and immediately afterwards.
DIVISION IN THE JACKSONIAN PARTY
In 1830 Calhoun was committed to state rights, the program of his
friends in South Carolina, and he could not seriously object to the
checking of internal improvements. In fact, the South
suPPorted the Maysville veto nearly unanimously. It
Men. was more concerned in impeding the progress of protection ;
and the doctrine of nullification, announced for that pur-
pose, was in danger of becoming the general slogan of that section.
Many Northern men felt that the doctrine ought to be opposed, and
the great Hayne- Webster debate, which occurred at this time, gave
them a feeling of relief, since it afforded the greatest champion of the
union, Daniel Webster, an opportunity to place before the country
the arguments for a stronger federal government.
The occasion of this celebrated debate was some resolutions offered
December 29, 1829, by Senator Foote, of Connecticut, looking to the
restriction of land sales. The Western senators objected
Resolution, immediately, thinking that Foote merely wished to check
the drain of Eastern population to the West. Benton, of
Missouri, a forceful but bitter debater, took up the cause of the West
in one of his characteristic speeches, and much feeling was aroused in
the senate. Then the advocates of states rights thought they saw
an opportunity to draw the West to their side. They wished to show
that it was not strictly constitutional for the federal government to
pass laws which bore hardly on any section, and that an attempt to
do so was but in keeping with the policy of building up one section
at the expense of another, a policy which must lead to hostility of
HAYNE AND WEBSTER 397
section against section with a resulting weakening of the bond of
union.
It was impossible to ignore the bearing of this argument on the
Southern protest against the protective tariff. It was set forth with
much skillfulness by Hayne, of South Carolina, a ready and
able debater, the equal, in the opinion of the Southerners,
of any debater in the senate. Then Webster, senator from
Massachusetts, came to the defense of the North. He
denied that his section wished to sacrifice to its own interest any other
section, and resented with special force the charge that it was hostile
to the West. Hayne had hinted that there was a constitutional way by
which a state could undo an unauthorized act of oppression at the hands
of the federal congress ; and Webster now boldly challenged the theory,
his purpose being to force Hayne to a more specific declaration of his
meaning. By this time the debate had ceased to be concerned with the
sale of Western lands and had become a discussion of the fundamental
principles of the constitution. The point at issue was : Can a State
legally defy the laws of congress, however much it may think them
unwarranted by the constitution ?
Hayne could not well avoid Webster's challenge, and to do him jus-
tice he had no desire to do so. All the state rights group were with
him and waited confidently for his reply. Many times in debate their
theory had been appealed to, but never had it been set forth in all its
completeness by a master of the art of presentation. Their
expectation was well known in the city and the chamber ,
i 111 T i Argument.
and galleries were crowded when on January 21, 1830, the
Southern champion rose to make his great speech. He was a man of
fine appearance and spoke with much grace, although he could utter
the sharpest criticisms on an adversary. He was given to making his
arguments personal, and resorted to the practice in this speech. In
this respect his utterances were neither dignified nor able. But he
soon passed on to the constitutional phase, where he spoke with better
effect. He accepted the "South Carolina Exposition" of 1828 as
sound doctrine, showed that it was in line with the Virginia and
Kentucky resolutions of 1798, and affirmed that it was the doctrine
that New England espoused when in Madison's administration she
found herself, like the South in 1830, suffering from laws enacted by
the majority in control of the national government. And then he took
up the cause of the South with great earnestness. Is the federal gov-
ernment, he asked, the judge of its own power? To assert the
affirmative, whether the power be exercised by congress or by the
supreme court, is to make the central government " a government with-
out limitation of powers" ! It is to reduce the states to the level of
mere corporations. He would speak a word for South Carolina. She
was but seeking to preserve herself from measures which had pros-
trated her industry and would soon impoverish the whole South ; she
398 JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
sought to preserve the union of states as it was founded, and to save
the states from usurpations which would leave them nothing they
could call their own.
Webster's reply was made on the 26th, the senate chamber being
crowded to its utmost capacity. Tall, dignified, with a striking
leonine face, a rich baritone voice, and a deliberate manner,
Reply.61 ke was easily tne best orator in the senate. He met the
personal thrusts of Hayne with a satirical courtesy which
lef t nothing to be desired by the friends of the speaker, watching
anxiously to see if their champion would meet the demands of the
occasion. In this respect neither speaker was calm nor properly self-
restrained, but even here Webster showed his mental superiority.
It was in his presentation of constitutional argument that we find
our chief satisfaction with the Northern champion. Frankly accept-
ing the consolidation theory, he proceeded to combat the
Situtional doctrine that a state may declare null a law of congress
Argument, without an appeal to revolution. This doctrine, he said,
rested on the false assumption that the federal government
was the creature of twenty-four states, each with a will of its own,
wills which were apt to be at variance with one another, the exercise
of which would reduce the central government to an absurdity. But
where lies true sovereignty but in the people for whom both the fed-
eral and state governments are agents? Each government derives
authority from the same source, each is supreme in its own sphere, and
the constitution in all that it pretends to regulate is, by the authority of
the sovereign people, the supreme law of the land. So far as the
constitution restrains the states, in so far is the authority of the states
not supreme. The constitution is a fact. Gentlemen may wish it had
been made otherwise than it was made : with that we have nothing to
do. It must be obeyed until it is changed. In one state, we may say,
the tariff is declared an act of usurpation, in another it is declared con-
stitutional ; how shall we reconcile the two points of view if we accept
the theory that a state may pass on the matter ? If the general gov-
ernment has no power to pass on the contending assertions, is it not
" a rope of sand " ? It is not claimed that the federal government has
unrestricted power. It has all the power given it in the constitution
made by the people, all this and no more. Among the specified powers
is the creation of a supreme judiciary to pass upon all questions arising
under the constitution, and it is to this court and not to any state
that we ought to refer the question of the power of congress to make
any law it assumes to make. Suppose South Carolina should declare
the tariff law null : must her agents not try to enforce the declaration ?
But the federal government declares it legal, and must its agent not
seek to enforce it? What would the result be but civil war? To
oppose the execution of the law is treason. Can a state be allowed
to commit treason with impunity ? If the constitution is imperfect
JACKSON AND NULLIFICATION 399
it can be amended by the people who made it, but as long as it is law
it should be obeyed.
From this splendid debate each side withdrew with complacent feel-
ings. The Southerners were pleased that their champion had set forth
their views of state sovereignty, the Northerners took
courage in seeing Webster support the glory and power of
the union by such masterly reasoning. But the debate,
final as it was as a statement of theory, went beyond the practical
situation. The country was not yet ready to follow the controversy to
the end which Webster so clearly foresaw, to civil war. Each side
treasured its own argument in memory for a more strenuous day, while
the practical politician took up the tasks actually before him. Of
this class were Jackson and Van Buren, generally supposed to lean
to state rights, but in their inner hearts willing to see Calhoun
and the South Carolinians discredited by the powerful forensics of
Webster.
By this time we may freely speak of the South Carolina theory as
nullification. Would it be generally adopted in the South ? The
insistence of its defenders that it was but the doctrine of 1798 shows
their anxiety to draw the Virginians to its support. It proved a
futile hope ; for Virginia, slighted in the make-up of the new admin-
istration, would not adopt the leadership of South Caro-
lina. More important was the attitude of Jackson, on Nullification
whose action the nullifiers waited uneasily. They sup- checked,
ported him in 1828, their leader, Calhoun, was high in party
councils, and they well knew that if the president, a Southerner him-
self, came over to their side, they would unite the South and be able
to force the North into a relinquishment of its high tariff policy.
Constitutional arguments are but the theoretical basis of a political
movement, and if practical ends could be attained, Webster's reasoning
might be ignored.
April 13, 1830, was Jefferson's birthday, generally celebrated by his
followers with speeches and toasts. This year the South Carolinians
controlled the arrangements of the celebration in Wash-
ington and planned to have the speeches express their
peculiar views of state rights. The president was invited Toast,
and was expected to give a toast. He was fully conscious
of all that was going on and consulted with Van Buren in regard to
his toast. Now at this time Jackson was in sympathy with the Van
Buren faction, as were, in fact, all of his "Kitchen Cabinet," and
it was decided that he should give such a toast as would show his
disapproval of Calhoun's theories. He arose at the feast with this
sentiment, " Our federal union, it must be preserved ! " The nullifiers
could only gasp. Calhoun, who was next called on, tried to retrieve
the situation by giving as his toast, "The union, next to our liberty,
most dear ! May we all remember that it can only be preserved by
400 JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
respecting the rights of the states and distributing equally the benefits
and burthen of the union ! " But the words of the president were most
significant. They indicated that he would not be brought into the
general Southern movement which the nullifiers planned.
In another respect Jackson thwarted the plans of the South Caro-
linians. In 1802 the United States, approving the cession of Georgia's
claim to Alabama and Mississippi, agreed to remove the
tae°Chiero-nd Creek and Cnerokee Indians from the limits of Georgia
kees. proper "as early as the same can be peaceably obtained
on reasonable terms.'' By several treaties all but 9,000,000
acres of the Indian lands were purchased before 1825 and opened to
settlement. But at this time the Indians decided in a council that
they would sell no more land. They had their separate form of
government, and their land, much of it very fertile, was desired for
white settlement. Georgia naturally thought it intolerable that there
should be a civil power within her borders which defied her authority,
and she called on the federal government to execute the agreement of
1802. Adams hesitated to do anything decisive. Then the state
announced that if the Indians were not removed she would exercise
her right as a sovereign state, by dividing the Indian lands into
counties, opening them to settlement, and establishing a white man's
government over them. By the constitution, congress had authority
over trade with the Indians and made treaties with them. It was also
provided that treaties should be the supreme law of the land. As
the Indians pleaded that they were protected by treaties, would not
the proposed action of Georgia violate the constitution ? The state
urged her own sovereignty over the territory within her limits, but
the Indians took the matter to the courts. Two important decisions
of the federal supreme court were the result. In one, the Cherokee
Nation vs. Georgia, it was held that an Indian tribe, while
fndian°f En not an ^dependent nation, was, nevertheless, a state, and
XriDgn under the protection of congress. In the other, Worcester
vs. Georgia, it was held by the court, Chief Justice Mar-
shall giving the decision, that the attempt of Georgia to extend her
jurisdiction over the lands formerly held by the Indians was
illegal.
These matters ran past the period to which our story has come,
for they extend from the beginning of Jackson's term to 1833 ; but
the sharp controversy they produced was in its critical
Georgia and phase in 1830. They were related to the general attempt
££^h of South Carolina to draw all the South to her support
Con- ' because they involved the theory of state sovereignty,
troversy. If Georgia leant so decidedly on the theory in her Indian
controversy, would she not make common cause with her
sister state in the fight to lower the tariff ? The nullifiers undoubtedly
expected as much, but they were disappointed. In the first place the
THE INTRIGUE AGAINST CALHOUN 401
men of Georgia were devoted to Crawford, who was bitterly opposed to
Calhoun. They supported Jackson in 1828, but adhered to the Van
Buren, rather than the Calhoun, faction. In the second place, Jack-
son gave them continual support in the Indian matter, informing the
Indians soon after his inauguration that there was nothing for them
but to submit and remove beyond the Mississippi. As the contro-
versy was still unsettled in 1830 Georgia dared not move against the
declared opposition of Jackson, who let it be known to the Georgians
that he expected their support in the defense of the cause of union.
Thus it happened that South Carolina saw her hopes of uniting all
the south in a common cause of nullification fall to the ground ; and
the turn of events augured no good for the Calhoun faction, whom the
Van Buren faction were bent on reducing, with Jackson's help, to a
position of inferiority. It was a sad blow to the ambition of the great
South Carolinian. Face to face with the loss of his own state in 1828,
he had been compelled to turn a somersault from nationalism to a
state rights position, and while he was in mid-air the artful Van Buren
struck him a blow which made his landing precarious.
In the autumn of 1829, when Jackson was deeply touched by what
he considered the combination to discredit Eaton through the exclusion
of Mrs. Eaton from society, the "Kitchen Cabinet" re-
vealed to him that Calhoun, formerly secretary of war,
wished in 1818 to discipline him for the invasion of Flor-
ida. Jackson knew that such a purpose was entertained Calhoun.
in the cabinet at the time, but he supposed that Crawford
was its author. Calhoun should have removed this suspicion, but
fearing Jackson's wrath, had allowed him to go on thinking that
Crawford was the author of the suggestion. When the truth at last
came out, Jackson, suspicious and of violent temper, would believe
nothing but that the South Carolinian had acted traitorously. He
said nothing openly until the Jefferson birthday dinner brought him
to the point of declared opposition ; for Calhoun had a powerful
following, and a false move would cause the public to think that party
harmony was jeopardized by personal intrigue. But now Calhoun
was identified with disunion and might be attacked with greater
safety.
The day after the birthday dinner a friend of Van Buren at the side
of the president wrote to Crawford for verification of the story that
had been privately revealed. The reply of Crawford, who
still hated Calhoun, was all that was expected. Then
began a bitter correspondence between president and vice- sp0ndence.
president, the highest man and next highest in the ad-
ministration party, in which neither convinced the other of his wrong-
doing. It ended with a curt note in which Jackson told his corre-
spondent that future friendship between them was impossible. Van
Buren was too shrewd to take open part in the affair. He was careful
2D
402 JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
not to talk with Jackson about it, but it is impossible to suppose that
he was ignorant of a matter so full of weight for his future. The breach
it produced was accentuated by the selection of a new party or-
gan, which up to this time had been the Daily Telegraph, edited by
Duff Green, a devoted Calhoun man. Frank P. Blair, destined to
become one of the most influential party editors of the day, was
The brought to Washington, and in December, 1830, he
founded the Globe, whose influence was soon widespread.
Blair was a firm friend of Jackson and gave all his energy to promot-
ing the cause of Van Bur en.
Since the president did not publish this correspondence, Calhoun
concluded that he feared to do so. Friends, to whom it was freely
shown, held the same view and thought that its publica-
^onounced tion wou1^ crus}1 the craftY New Yorker. Then Calhoun
Traiton"* to°^ tne initiative, laying his case before the public in a
pamphlet which saw the light of day in February, 1831.
The Globe immediately charged Calhoun with an attempt to sow dis-
sension in the party, the administrative press and politicians, fearing
the wrath of Jackson, took up the cry, and by the end of spring Cal-
houn was fiercely denounced as a party traitor.
By the spring of 1831 the anti-Calhoun men were so strong that
they were prepared to thrust their opponents out of the cabinet.
But even here the proceedings were marked by consum-
Cabhiet mate skill. Fearing that a bald dismissal would plant
irreconcilable hatred within the party, it was arranged
that Van Buren and Eaton should resign voluntarily. They gave as
their reason the desire to relieve Jackson from the embarrassment of
their presence, but before resigning they had been promised other
positions. Van Buren was to be minister to England, and it was
thought that Eaton could be elected senator from Tennessee. When
this faction had withdrawn, the president, with every outward appear-
ance of impartiality, called for the withdrawal of the others, so that
neither should have the advantage in the cabinet. He thus got rid
of the Calhounites, but he did not on that account fail to fill the new
cabinet with men opposed to Calhoun. He thus remade the govern-
ment on a Van Buren basis.
The next feature of the party program was to look out for the
nomination for the presidency in 1832. Jackson had formerly de-
clared that he would accept only one term. But his
nominated*" frien(is kn"ew tnat if ne now withdrew, it would be difficult
to secure the nomination for Van Buren, openly charged
with the intrigue against Calhoun. They had good reason to
fear that the South Carolinian, the next most popular democrat
to Jackson, would be indorsed by the party. Jackson himself under-
stood the situation, and in the autumn of 1831 let it be known that he
would again be a candidate. He planned to have Van Buren remain
INTRIGUE TRIUMPHANT 403
in London until the excitement of the recent quarrel subsided, and to
return in time to be made candidate in 1836. But in January, 1832,
the senate rejected Van Buren's nomination as minister by the casting
vote of Calhoun, the vice-president ; and such an outburst of feeling
came from the Jackson following that it was decided that the only
way to vindicate the rejected man was to make him Jackson's running-
mate. Thus was taken the last step in the identification of the fav-
ored New Yorker with the head of the party. In 1829 the party was
threatened with disintegration through the fierce rivalry within it.
By the most skillful management, the Calhoun faction had been re-
duced to a harmless minimum, and led through its own blundering into
open revolt at a time when its secession was not a serious danger. At
the same time, Jackson had grown in strength with the masses and was
at the head of a mighty host which looked to him as the chosen leader
against forces of corruption. Jacksonian democracy was completely
organized and confident of the future.
THE ELECTION OF 1832
Meanwhile, an opposition was forming under Clay's leadership.
All who criticized Jackson's appointments, or rejected his policy of
internal improvements, or opposed his attitude toward the
bank, — already announced but not pressed to its con- JJ^J^e
elusion (see page 411), — and many others whose chief pelicans"
impulse was dislike for a leader of the Jackson type, all
these now came together under the name of national republicans. In
calling themselves by this title they seem to have had in mind the
division of the party which prevailed in the years immediately after
the war of 1812. They also proclaimed themselves faithful tariff men,
but on this issue Jackson was not openly against them.
Besides these, a third party was in the field. In 1826 William
Morgan, of Batavia, New York, who had published a book purporting
to expose the secrets of freemasonry, mysteriously dis-
appeared, and many people believed he had been destroyed The
by the masons. A frantic movement spread through the
adjoining counties for the outlawry of the order, which ganized.
was denounced as a secret political society. The anti-
masonic party was thus organized. As Clinton was a mason, it op-
posed him, and as Jackson was also a mason and had the support of
Clinton, it supported Adams in 1828. The party was organized in
several other states in this election, and generally opposed Jackson.
They were able to hold the balance of power in some states and elected
several members of congress.
As the election of 1832 approached, attempts were made to get them
to support Clay; but he would not declare for their principles, and
they decided to act alone. In September, 1830, they held a national
404 JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
convention in Philadelphia, in which it was decided to organize a
national party. This assembly made an appeal to the people and
called a convention at Baltimore, September 26, 1831, to select a
candidate for the presidency, the first national nominating conven-
tion in our history. It met in due time and selected William Wirt,
of Virginia, as its candidate for the presidency and Amos
First Na- Ellmaker, of Pennsylvania, for the vice-presidency. The
Nominating example °f the antimasons was followed by the national
Convention, republicans, who in December, 183 1, assembled in Baltimore
and nominated Clay for president, and Sergeant, of Pennsyl-
vania, for vice-president. In the following May a convention of young
men who supported Clay met in Washington, accepted the Baltimore
nominations, and issued the first " platform" of a political party in
America. It indorsed protection and internal improvements, and
arraigned Jackson's administration for its policy in appointments to
office, and its attitude toward the Indians in Georgia. In May, 1832,
the democrats followed the example of their opponents and met in
a convention at Baltimore. They nominated Jackson unanimously,
and Van Buren by a vote of 208 to 75. This convention ordered that a
two-thirds vote should be necessary to a nomination, a rule followed
in every succeeding convention of the party.
The convention system, thus introduced, has proved a permanent
feature of American political life. After the caucus was repudiated
in 1824 candidates were nominated by state legislature.
Convention jn -^g the candidates were so well designated by the trend
Develop- °^ events that this system was satisfactory. It would
ment. probably have been satisfactory, so far as Jackson was
concerned, in 1832 ; for his party had no thought of re-
jecting him as a candidate. Indeed, as the election year approached,
he was nominated by many legislatures and local or state conventions.
But the other parties were not so fortunate. The antimasons were at
sea until the convention assembled, and the national republicans,
though united in Clay's favor, needed the effect of a great display of
their strength to impress themselves on the minds of voters. In the
democratic party a convention was necessary to secure the acceptance
of Van Buren, in whose behalf Jackson exerted all his power over his
followers. It was, probably, only the fear of offending Jackson which
made Van Buren the candidate.
The adoption of nomination by convention shows how democratic
parties had now become. The delegates, at first chosen in varying
manners, represented the party in the localities from which
ChSactef of they came' Their selection was the best utterance of
the Party. the party's voice then possible. The earliest method was
generally to allot to each state as many votes in con-
vention as it had in the electoral college. Later practice has given
each state twice as many votes as it has presidential electors.
THE ELECTION OF 1832 405
The campaign which followed these nominations was vehement.
The democrats relied on the popular confidence in Jackson. He was,
they said, the people's candidate, he would pay the national
debt, he would deprive the bank of its privileges, and he
protected the treasury from the wiles of the people who
wished to have roads and canals at the expense of the national revenues.
Clay's support was of a complex character. In one section he relied
on the friendship of the business classes for the bank, in others he
appealed to the protectionists, and in still others he talked about the
radicalism of Jackson. In July, while the canvass progressed, the
president vetoed the bill to recharter the bank. Clay's friends had
urged the bill, thinking that a veto would array against Jackson the
state of Pennsylvania as well as the powerful financial class. The
national republicans received the veto message with undisguised
pleasure and pressed the battle more vigorously. They were soon
undeceived. The farmers of Pennsylvania cared nothing for the
bank, and they rallied to the support of its arch foe in proportion as
the capitalists proclaimed their hostility to him. The result of the
election was 219 electoral votes for Jackson, 49 for Clay,
and 7 for Wirt, while South Carolina, piqued over the
treatment of Calhoun, threw away her 1 1 votes on Floyd
of Virginia. Van Buren carried all of the Jackson votes but the
thirty from Pennsylvania, which were given to Wilkins, of that state.
Wirt's vote came from Vermont, the only state the antimasons could
carry. This poor showing was the death knell of that party. Jackson
very naturally took his overwhelming victory as an indorsement of
his policies, and prepared to put them into complete execution.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The period embraced in this chapter is treated in the general Histories of Mc-
Master, Schouler, and Wilson. The best single volume on the period is Mac-
Donald's Jacksonian Democracy (1906). With the inauguration of Jackson, Von
Hoist, Constitutional History oj the United States, 8 vols. (Mason, trans. 1876-1892),
becomes valuable on the constitutional and political side, although it leans strongly
toward the party of concentration. An excellent short summary is Wilson, Divi-
sion and Reunion (revised ed., 1909), and nearly as useful is Burgess, The Middle
Period (1897).
Besides the biographies and writings of Jackson, Calhoun, Clay, Webster, J. Q.
Adams, Benton, and Wirt already mentioned (see page 380), the following are
valuable : Sumner, Life of Jackson (ed. 1897) ; Shepard, Life of Martin Van Buren,
(revised, ed., 1899) ; Stickney, editor, Autobiography of Amos Kendall (1872) ; J. A.
Hamilton, Reminiscences (1869); Curtis, Life of James Buchanan, 2 vols. (1883);
Works of James Buchanan, 12 vols. (Moore, ed., 1908-1911); Tyler, Letters
and Times of the Tylers, 3 vols. (1884-1896) ; Bradley, Isaac Hill (1835) ; Story,
Life and Letters of Joseph Story, 2 vols. (1851) ; Hunt, Life of Edward Livingston
(1864) ; Hammond, Life of Silas Wright (1848) ; and Jervey, Robert Y. Hayne
(1909).
The sources are chiefly in the public documents, the most important being:
Executive, in the series known as State Papers, 38 vols., extending to the first years
406 JACKSON'S FIRST ADMINISTRATION
of Van Buren's administration. The most significant for the present chapter are
Finance, 5 vols., and Indian Affairs, 2 vols. See also Richardson, Messages and
Papers oj the Presidents, 1789-1902, 10 vols. (1897-1902). Legislative, the debates
in the Register of Debates, 1825-1837, 29 vols., with valuable appendices containing
many reports of committees, etc., and Benton, Abridgment of Debates, 16 vols. (1857-
1861). Judiciary, the reports of the decisions of the supreme court, published in
series bearing the names of the reporter until 1882, and from that time they are
numbered continuously. Those extending over the years 1828 to 1842 are cited
as Peters, 16 vols. Bowker, State Publications, 2 vols. (1899-1902), is a useful index
to published government documents. The laws are in Peters, Statutes at Large,
8 vols. (1845-1846), volumes 7 and 8 contain treaties. Treaties and Conventions
(ed. of 1889) is also very useful. Other important sources are : J. Q. Adams,
Memoirs, 12 vols. (1874-1877) ; Ibid., Writings, W. C. Ford, ed. (1913-) ; Benton,
Thirty Years' View, 2 vols. (1854-1857) ; Mayo, Political Sketches (1839) ; Wise,
Seven Decades of the Union (1881) ; and Niles, Register, a weekly newspaper in which
appear many documents.
The controversy over the interpretation of the constitution gave rise to many
works. The most important on the national side are : Von Hoist, Constitutional
History of the United States, 8 vols. (Mason trans., 1876-1892), is the most compre-
hensive narrative from the national point of view. Of the same nature is Lodge,
Life of Webster (1897) ; and Greeley, The American Conflict, 2 vols. (1864-1867).
On the state rights side see : Jefferson Davis, Rise and Fall of the Confederate Gov-
ernment, 2 vols. (1881) ; Wise, Seven Decades of the Union (1881) ; and Tucker,
History of the United States, 4 vols. (1856-1858). For references on nullification see
below, page 426.
For Independent Reading
Harvey, Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Daniel Webster (1877) ; Lyman Beecher,
Autobiography, 2 vols. (1863-1865); Poore, Perley's Reminiscences, 2 vols. (1886);
Wentworth, Congressional Reminiscences (1882) ; Charles A. Davis, Letters of
Major Jack Downing (1833), — humorous and widely read by contemporaries, but
misleading in regard to Jackson's character; and Sullivan, Familiar Letters on
Public Characters (1834).
CHAPTER XX
JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
THE END OF NULLIFICATION
IT was natural for Jackson to think his triumphant reelection an
evidence of popular approval for all his important policies. Thus
reassured, ana supported by a united party, he could take
up the incomplete work of his first administration with tc
the assurance of success. He might secure the removal of
the Georgia Indians, bring to an end the negotiations with France,
and break down the power of the bank of the United States, which
he considered a menace to democratic institutions. But the first
serious problem after the election was to deal with nullification. It
was a problem he did not invite and could not avoid ; for the South
Carolinians, having lost hope of placing their great leader in the
White House, were now determined to put their theory to the ultimate
test.
It will be remembered that Calhoun came to open breach with
Jackson with the publication of his pamphlet in February, 1831,
which he at first hoped would destroy Van Buren and not
provoke the opposition of Jackson (see page 401). By
the middle of May he realized that this expectation was
futile and became the public, as for three years he had been
the secret, leader of the nullifiers. July 26 he issued his famous "Ad-
dress to the People of South Carolina," in which were restated the
arguments in the "Exposition" of 1828. It was the avowed plat-
form of his followers, and was widely read, North and South. All
through the autumn, winter, and following spring it was widely dis-
cussed in South Carolina. The union party there was of respectable
size, though not in a majority, and they naturally sought to
lessen the weight of his doctrine. In the discussion various
explanations were given of its meaning, for it was not
clear in all its points. At last the nullifiers themselves Nullification.
called on him for a simpler statement, and August 28,
1832, he published such a summary in what became known as his
"Fort Hill Letter," addressed to Governor James Hamilton, Jr. The
result of this agitation was that the nullifiers carried the legislature by
a large majority.
407
408 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
To this body soon after it met in October came a message from the
governor urging that, inasmuch as the federal government was com-
mitted to the tariff which was believed to be unconstitu-
tional> it: was tlie duty of tne state to look out for tne m~
Convention. terests of the people. Since the constitution, it said, was
authorized by the people of the state, it was for them now
to call a convention to inquire if the federal compact had been violated.
The legislature accepted the suggestion, and by a large majority called
a convention to meet November 19, 1832.
No one could doubt what that body would do. By a vote of 136 to
26 it passed on the 24th the South Carolina Ordinance of Nullification,
declaring the tariff acts of 1828 and 1832 not binding on the
The Ordi- people of the state, forbidding appeals to the federal courts
Num- ° *n cases f°r tne enforcement of the said laws, and requiring
fication. state officials to take oath to uphold the ordinance. Feb-
ruary i, 1833, was fixed as the day on which nullification
should go into effect, and the legislature was directed to pass such
laws as should be necessary to put the ordinance into effect.
November 27 the legislature reassembled. It was foreseen that if a
citizen refused to pay duties on goods, the articles in question would
be seized by federal efficers, and to enable him to recover
plevin Act. tnem the replevin act was now passed. It provided that
the owners of goods seized might recover twice their value
from the official holding them. As this was a state law, and as the
state officials were all nullifiers, it was likely that the replevin act
would be executed with liberality toward the persons who refused to
pay duties. On the other hand, it seemed certain that the federal
government would not tamely give up its power to seize goods for
failure to pay duties, and if war came it would come at this point in the
controversy. The legislature did not overlook the fact, and it author-
ized the governor to call out the militia to enforce the laws of the state.
There was a great deal -of excitement in the state, unionists and nulli-
fiers held nightly meetings, and threats of war and secession were
heard on every hand.
While affairs progressed to this state President Jackson kept his eye
on the situation. Knowing that the nullifiers only threatened in the
hope that they could force congress to modify the tariff,
Precautions. ne felt that thev woul(i hesitate to go as far as war. But
he took occasion in several ways to drop quiet hints that
the laws must be obeyed. It was not until the autumn that he came
to believe that nullification would actually be attempted. Then he
ordered the secretary of the navy to be ready to send a force to Charles-
ton, if necessary. He also directed the commanding officers of the
forts in the harbor to be vigilant in detecting resistance, sent a special
messenger to report on sentiment in the state, gave constant encourage-
ment to the union party there, and deposited arms in convenient
JACKSON'S PROCLAMATION 409
places in North Carolina to be ready for an emergency. Seven revenue
cutters and the Natchez, a ship of war, appeared in Charleston
harbor and cast anchor where they could rake the fashionable " Bat-
tery," on which were the residences of the leading citizens. For many
weeks the tension was extreme. Nullifiers and unionists, equally
desirous of delaying bloodshed, strove to restrain the feelings of their
followers, lest some accident should precipitate war before the last
efforts for peace were exhausted.
In Washington two groups of men were seeking to meet the situa-
tion. One, under the lead of the president, planned to meet force
with force and to assert the authority of the government.
From this source came Jackson's nullification proclamation, Th® **^l&-
T\ T. r , v cation Proc-
December 10, 1832. It was a firm argument against the lamation.
theory of nullification, and closed by warning the people of
South Carolina against the advocates of nullification. "The laws of
the United States must be executed," said Jackson in words like those
of Lincoln twenty-nine years later; "I have no discretionary power on
the subject ; my duty is emphatically pronounced in the constitution.
Those who told you that you might peaceably prevent their execution,
deceived you ; they could not have been deceived themselves. They
know that a forcible opposition could alone prevent the execution of
the laws, and they know that such opposition must be repelled. Their
object is disunion. But be not deceived by names. Disunion by
armed force is treason.'1 Many of Jackson's followers were state
rights men, and they were not pleased with his open es- £ffe
pousal of consolidation doctrines. But all the unionists of
the country, of whatever party, took fresh courage when they read the
proclamation. For once New England and the great cities of the
northern coast, following the lead of Webster and John Quincy Adams,
were in hearty support of Jackson.
The second group wished to solve the difficult problem before the
nation by enacting a bill for a lower tariff. That done, nulli-
fication as a practical measure would vanish. They were
lead by the particular friends of Van Buren, who could not Tj^c^.er"
hope to have the democratic support in 1836 if the north- ^ariff Bill,
ern and southern portions of the party fell into conflict
over state rights. They brought in the Verplanck bill, proposing to
lower duties to a basis of 20 per cent in two years, hoping that with
the support of the South and as many votes as Van Buren could rally
in the North the measure would pass. If the project succeeded,
Van Buren would be applauded as " Pacificator." Jackson counte-
nanced the plan, but gave most of his attention to his own plans for
preserving the authority of the federal government.
Meanwhile, the attitude of the other Southern states became very
important, both to South Carolina and to the president. Georgia
wavered for a while, but the fear that she would lose Jackson's sym-
410 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
pathy in regard to her Indian question held her in check. If she had
gone over to the milliners, it is probable that the other Gulf states
would have followed her lead. Much anxiety was also
the S^uti^ felt for VirSinia> and the nullifiers tried hard to convince
Do? her that they but stood for the Virginia resolutions of
1798. Agents were sent to Richmond to labor with the
legislature there. Their best effort could not accomplish their purposes.
Although there was strong sentiment in that state for state rights, the
most the legislature would do was to send an agent to South Carolina
to try to make peace between the state and the federal authorities.
North Carolina took an even more conservative stand, declaring that
she would defend the cause of union. The nullifiers were thus made
to see that if war came, they must proceed alone. But many people
feared that if fighting once began, it would be impossible to restrain
all the South from rallying to the support of South Carolina in her
struggle against the tariff.
Jackson was now thoroughly aroused, and thought only of using
force. Offers of troop came from many states, and Washington was
full of war talk. January 16, 1833, he sent congress a
Ell?" ' sPecial message on the situation, and on the 2ist one of
his friends introduced the " force bill," called by the Cal-
hounites the "bloody bill." It gave the president the authority to
call out the army and navy to enforce the laws of congress. Jackson
used all his influence to have it passed. Calhoun proclaimed it a
tyrannical measure, and the states rights men generally considered it
an invasion of the rights of the states. This bill and the Verplanck
tariff bill were urged contemporaneously, one by the unionists, the
other by the democrats generally.
As January neared an end, it became evident that the tariff bill
could not pass. In fact, only one man could get enough Northern
votes to pass a bill lowering the tariff, and that man was
" Clay' the fatl?er of the "American System." Many
Tariff. people urged him to exert himself for peace and save the
union from civil war. For a long time he hesitated, but
so much was gained for compromise that on February i the leading
nullifiers met and decided to suspend the execution of the ordinance
of nullification until they could see what congress would do. Then
Clay at last yielded. February 12 he introduced in the senate a bill
to reduce the tariff gradually during the next ten years, until in 1842
it should be at 20 per cent. The nullifiers and the South supported
it, and enough of Clay's friends followed him to make it a law in the
last days of the short session. To secure this result Calhoun agreed
not to oppose the " force bill," which also became law as the session
was about to adjourn. Thus ended the controversy. South Carolina,
having secured the reduction of the tariff, repealed her nullification
ordinance, and peace returned to the troubled face of national affairs.
Clay, and not Van Buren, was hailed "Pacificator !"
THE QUESTION OF RECHARTER 41 1
JACKSON'S "WAR" AGAINST THE BANK
Jackson was pleased to have nullification off the stage, because he
thought the time was come to finish his long struggle against the Bank
of the United States. Early in his career he concluded
that a bank controlled by one group of capitalists was J^* Begin"
dangerous to the welfare of the country and of doubtful
constitutionality. Most of the bank's officers, at its headquarters in
Philadelphia, as well as in the branches, were anti- Jackson men, and
this gave rise to the charge that the institution worked for Jackson's
defeat. The new party believed the allegation, although it was not
very clearly proved, and they came into office disposed to use their
power against the bank. They at once preferred charges
against the Portsmouth, New Hampshire, branch. Nicho-
las Biddle, president of the "mother bank," as it was
called, defended the branch in some warm words which
only provoked further the party in power. After a while, he became
more moderate, and an investigation showed that the Portsmouth
branch was not guilty of the charges made. The incident was later
pronounced the origin of the attack on the bank, the argument being
that all the opposition that followed was because in this affair the ad-
ministration was thwarted in a plan to get political control of the
bank. The statement is not true. Jackson's attitude dates back at
least twelve years, and he had nothing to do with the Portsmouth
incident. On the other hand, in the autumn of 1829
Biddle had allowed the Jackson men to get control of Biddle's
several of the Western branches and was trying through Firs* Sug~
c • , . ,Tr , . ./ gestionofa
friends in Washington to induce the president to agree ^ew
that a recharter should be granted. Several members of charter,
the " Kitchen Cabinet," and the majority of the regular
cabinet, favored his scheme, and he was confident of success.
But Jackson's mind was made up. Rash in the outburst of his
feeling, he could be as prudent as any one when policy demanded. He
left Biddle in the dark for a month, and gave him a sad
disappointment in the first annual message, December 8, J*ckson
1829. The bank's charter, he said, would expire in 1836, B/ddlT"1
and it was not too soon for congress and the people to
begin to consider the wisdom of a recharter. He added that there
were grave doubts about the constitutionality of the bank, and that
it certainly had failed to establish "a uniform and sound currency."
He suggested a bank founded upon the credit and revenues of the
government, having in view chiefly the note-issuing and deposit func-
tions. From all that came after, it is clear that he wished to take from
private hands the large power and profit the bank then had. Prob-
ably he did not realize how severe a shock such a change would give
4i2 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
to business. His party was more prudent, and it shrank from a battle
with the powerful bank. On every hand his foes decried the sugges-
tion in the message, and many of his friends held back. But the
believers in state rights and the mass of people, whose instincts were
against monopoly, were more favorable. In congress two committees
reported that the bank was in a good condition, and thus the matter
rested for a time.
But in his second annual message, December 6, 1830, Jackson re-
turned to the charge, now unfolding a detailed plan for such a bank as
he thought advisable. It was to be connected with the
Jackson's treasury department and managed by public officials.
Idea of a The scheme was at once attacked on the ground that it
b would vastly increase the patronage of the administration ;
Gov- and the point was a good one ; for Jackson's appoint-
ernment. ments were bad and it did not seem safe to enlarge them
in the way he now suggested. Nothing was done in the
matter, and congress adjourned in March. The net result accom-
plished was that the question had been placed fairly before the country
and opinion was forming on the inevitable problem, which must be met
in one way or another before 1836.
When congress met again, the country was on the eve of a presidential
election. Jackson's friends knew they would be embarrassed if the
bank were an issue, and he yielded to them so far as
Biddle merely to restate his position in his message, not asking
Charted* ^or Pos^^ve legislation. Biddle, watching the situation
through keenly, took this for a sign of weakness. If the attack
Congress. were made, might it not come better now, when Jackson's
cause was before the people, than later, when he was tri-
umphantly reelected ? The national republicans, Clay at their head,
thought the bank very popular in the country ; they wished to force a
new charter through congress, believing that if it were vetoed the presi-
dent would lose Pennsylvania and other strong commercial states in
the East, without which he could not be reelected. This view ap-
pealed strongly to many of Jackson's friends, among them the secre-
tary of the treasury, McLane. During the first weeks of the session
there was much conferring in order to prepare a bill which both Biddle
and Jackson would accept; but the upshot was that the president
would yield nothing, and in January, 1832, Biddle, deciding to
proceed without Jackson's approval, formally asked congress for a
charter. He was warned that if his bill passed it would be vetoed.
Indeed, after all Jackson had said against the bank he could hardly do
otherwise. But recharter was pressed, the bank employing an able
lobby in its behalf, and Biddle himself, a man of great abil-
il;y» S°inS to Washington to lead the fight. In July the
charter passed by safe majorities and was immediately ve-
toed. The veto message was a shrewd campaign document. It declared
REMOVAL OF THE DEPOSITS 413
the bank unconstitutional, pronounced it a monopoly, and appealed to
the people's hostility toward great capitalistic institutions. To the
friends of the bank these reasons seemed very flimsy ; but the veto
appealed to the people, and supported by Jackson's prestige it proved
unassailable. His election by a vote of 219 to 49 for Clay and 7 for
Wirt was received as evidence that the country indorsed the veto.
In the next session of congress nullification and the tariff played a
leading part, and the bank question was not brought forward. But
Jackson had his plan made, and as soon as the South
Carolina crisis was safely passed he began to put it into h^s ^ stl
execution. It was evident that Biddle did not accept the
election as a final verdict. To close up the business of the bank in
1836 would mean calling in a great mass of loans and the withdrawal
from circulation of much bank money. From both processes business
must suffer. Many men foresaw this, foes as well as friends of the
bank. Would the country at the last willingly undergo the calamity ?
Biddle thought that when the crisis came he might be able to carry a
charter over a veto ; Jackson believed the same, but he put
it another way. He said that the bank would wait until To be
the last and use its power of calling in loans to produce a Decked by ,
. J &- . * ., r the Removal
panic and thus wring a charter out of congress in spite of a of the
veto. He was thoroughly angry with Biddle, and believed Deposits,
him capable of any wickedness. He therefore proposed
to meet the emergency by breaking the power of the bank in 1833, so
that in 1836 it should not be able to produce a panic ; and his means of
breaking it was to withdraw the public deposits, place them with the
leading state banks, and gradually strengthen those institutions, so
that in 1836 they would be able to take over the duties of the great
institution and lessen the shock of the country from its destruction.
The charter provided that the deposits might be removed by the sec-
retary of the treasury while congress was not in session, provided he gave
his reasons for the removal to congress when it assembled.
As congress would not meet until December, there was
ample time for the proposed action ; but Secretary McLane
was unwilling to order removal, and Jackson, wishing to
avoid another explosion in his cabinet, hesitated to dismiss him.
After some conference it was agreed to send Livingston, secretary of
state, to France as minister, to promote McLane to the vacant place,
and to get a new secretary of the treasury. The man hit upon was
William J. Duane, son of that former editor of the Aurora, who was
long the tribune of the people in the important state of Pennsylvania.
If the order for removal were given by such a man, it would go far to
relieve the act from the expected criticisms of the enemy in the home
state of the "mother bank." The offer flattered Duane, who
was hitherto little known, and he entered upon his new duties
late in May.
414 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
But now appeared many difficulties. The new secretary said he
was not sure the deposits were in danger, and he was told to take time
to consider. At the end of a month he thought the matter
Disjoint cou^ ke left unt^ congress met. Then there were many
ment!PC conferences, at the end of which he assured the president
that he would examine the question again and would
resign if he did not give the desired order. At the middle of September
he was again interviewed, and declared finally that he would neither re-
move the deposits nor resign. Jackson was very angry, and dismissed
Duane summarily. The bank men said much about the sacrifice of a
faithful secretary, but posterity has little sympathy for him. He
must have known for what purpose he was appointed, and he should
have refused in advance or withdrawn as soon as he knew the attitude
of the president. On the other hand, there is no reason to believe that
the deposits in the bank were unsafe, as Jackson claimed.
Roger B. Taney was now appointed secretary of the treasury, and an
order issued at once designating certain great state banks at which all
government funds should be deposited from October i , 1833.
July> l833, the public deposits were $6,512,000, and it
would have been disastrous to withdraw so large an amount
at once. Jackson, therefore, was satisfied to cease to deposit with the
bank and to draw out the money very gradually. January i, 1836, it
still had $627,000 of government funds. Nevertheless, the action
of the president caused serious financial distress. The bank must call
in loans, and making ready to close its business it could not increase
its circulation. The winter, spring, and summer following
Th Busi60* removal brought severe business depression to the country,
ness Jackson's friends declared that the distress was artificial,
and due to Biddle's malice ; and they declared that it was
only a speculator's panic and did not injure the mass of merchants
and producers. It is hard to say how much truth. was in this opinion.
Certainly Biddle was in an ugly frame of mind, and did little to soften
the blow his adversary had given to business. By refusing to lend
money in the darkest days of necessity he brought the country to
think the charges against him were true. His own friends began to
leave him, and at last he was forced to resume lending. This hap-
pened in March, 1834, and by the middle of summer business was re-
turning to normal conditions.
Meanwhile, the matter was in the hands of the politicians. Taney
sent to congress, as required by the charter, his reasons for trans-
ferring the deposits. Clay made them the occasion for two
Censured resolutions, one of which declared that Jackson acted il-
legally in regard to the deposits, and the other that Taney's
reasons for his action were not sufficient. After an angry debate Clay
carried his resolutions through the senate. Jackson made a dignified
protest against the resolutions censuring him, and when they passed,
JACKSON'S VIGOROUS DIPLOMACY 415
his friend, Ben ton, of Missouri, gave notice that he would jn the future
move to expunge them. This he did in successive sessions, until at last
there was a majority of democrats in the senate, and January 16,
1837, an order was passed to write across the original entry in the
journal the statement that the resolutions of censure were directed to
be expunged. Clay in 1834 was also able to get the senate to reject
Taney's nomination as secretary of the treasury, but in 1836, through
support of Jackson, Taney became chief justice, in succession to John
Marshall.
Thus ended in complete triumph Jackson's attack on the bank, the
severest political conflict in our national history. It was the occasion
of many angry and false charges. The bank was well
managed and rendered valuable service to the government Significance
and people, and the allegations to the contrary were the ?, gj^
outgrowth of ignorance and prejudice. On the other War."
hand, it was a private monopoly, which reaped rich re-
ward for the service it rendered, and it was destroyed because the
people, in support of the president, felt that no corporation should
have so much advantage. Jackson represented the popular will. He
went into the conflict with a divided party, but he fought so wisely and
boldly that he united his party and made his word its law. His success
was the despair of his enemies.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS
Jackson displayed in foreign affairs the same energy and directness
that characterized his conduct of domestic relations. Three important
problems of this nature came before him, and they were all disposed of
in such a manner as to satisfy the American people and to increase our
prestige with other nations. Two of them were old disputes which had
dragged on without prospect of fair settlement under his predecessors,
and one was a new problem.
The first concerned the trade with the West Indies, before the revolu-
tion a source of great prosperity. This branch of our commerce was of
great importance to New England and the Middle states,
and many efforts to secure it on an equal footing with Eng-
land were made while the federalists controlled the national
government. The same eagerness was not manifested by the republicans
under Jefferson and Madison, and the development of manufactures,
absorbing much of the business energy of the country, lessened the
demand for commerce. But all the time there was a feeling that the
lost trade should be recovered if England could be induced to yield it.
The matter was under consideration in making the treaty of Ghent,
but it offered so much difficulty that it was postponed for a separate
convention, which met in 1815, but effected no results. It was taken
4i6 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
up again by Secretary Adams in 1818, and was a constant subject of
negotiation during his secretaryship, but nothing was accomplished.
Indeed, the net result was that each side became irritated, the United
States undertook to retaliate, and England became firmer than ever
in her refusal. Adams was ever an outspoken man, zealous for
national interests, and apt to be assertive in his diplomacy. To force
concessions from the self -sufficient and rather overbearing Briton re-
quired more tact than he possessed.
The real obstacle to success was the navigation laws. From
their enactment it had been the policy of England to consider her
colonies the proper field for the profit of her merchants
tion Law?*" an<^ ner snip°wners- Our ministers might try as they
Receding. could to snow ner tne advantage of open trade, but they
were not able to convince her. Preferential duties
continued to be charged in the West Indies against all comers, and the
United States fared as the rest of the world. But just at this time
English opinion was changing in regard to the navigation laws. The
loss of the American market through the development of manufac-
tures here and the raising of the tariff bars had put the British mer-
chants to thinking. On the other hand, a wide demand for British
goods in South America and elsewhere had produced a great wave
of prosperity, which tended to make the merchants think their remnant
of colonial trade of less importance than their commerce with the
outside world. At the same time, a group of liberals under the leader-
ship of Huskisson and Robinson were striving to bring the British
public to see that the existing acts did not suit the needs of a nation
dependent on happy trade relations with the whole world. In 1825
they induced parliament to make a first step in concession. Foreign
nations were now offered in the colonies such commercial
" privileges, both as regards tariffs and tonnage duties,
as they themselves conceded to Great Britain; and
one year was allowed during which the offer might be
accepted. The concession was open to any government, but it most
concerned the United States, by their position and industrial enter-
prise the strongest competitor of the mother country in these colonies.
Many nations accepted the offer, but our rising sentiment in favor
of protection and a willingness of the opposition to impede any action
suggested by the administration prevented concessions by congress
within a year. At the end of that time English prosperity had been
checked, parliament abandoned its liberal attitude, and although
a special American envoy went to England to make a treaty, nothing
could be gained in that quarter.
This was the situation when Jackson became president, with the
tactful Van Buren secretary of state. To win a victory where others
had failed appealed to both men, and McLane, the minister to London,
departed in full hope of doing something. He was allowed to
THE CLAIMS AGAINST FRANCE 417
write his own instructions, and he incorporated in them the sentiment
that our former position was wrong and had been repudiated by
the people in a national election. For this Van Buren was
severely criticized by his enemies, and it was urged The Nego-
as a main reason for his rejection as minister in g*^Jrc~
1832. It was certainly not dignified for a secretary un™er
in a communication to a foreign power to take cogni- Jackson,
zance of a domestic party difference.
But the advance pleased Great Britain, and the negotiations
then resumed soon led to success. Acting on a hint from McLane,
congress gave the president power to remove the discrimi-
nating tonnage duties as soon as England did the same.
This condition was easily met, and October 5, 1830,
Jackson by proclamation opened the trade with the British West
Indies. The arrangement did not involve a remission of custom
duties, but we could hardly expect another nation to give up her
tariff against us as long as we maintained our tariff against her.
The best result of the agreement was to remove a source of irritation
between the two nations. The democrats declared it a great victory
and were disposed to think it might have been secured sooner if
Adams had used more tact and patience.
The second diplomatic success concerned claims we had long urged
against France for property seized by Napoleon. Other nations
had formerly had such claims, but they were paid after
the fall of the Corsican. . The United States had no
friend at the congress of Vienna and were left to deal
with the French government as they could. To their
protests the Bourbon kings replied that France could not undertake
to pay for all the depredations of Napoleon, the usurper. Our
rejoinder that she had already paid for those committed by him against
other powers met this position effectively; but the monarchy was
continually in need of money, and the claims were left unsettled.
Rives, our first minister under Jackson, Vent out with instructions
to press vigorously for settlement. He proceeded so well that in
less than a year he got the French ministry to propose to pay a definite
sum to cover all losses. Then France advanced a counterclaim for
damages alleged under a clause of the Louisiana purchase treaty
guaranteeing certain commercial privileges to France. This checked
the negotiations until it was finally proposed to offset it by lowering
the American duties on certain French wines. Rives now hoped
for success, but all came to naught when in July, 1830,
the king, Charles X, was driven from his throne and Jilat'8
Louis Philippe took his place. After some delay nego- l83I
tiations were resumed, and July 4, 1831, the persistent
and cautious Rives was gratified by signing a treaty by which we
were to receive 25,000,000 francs for all our claims, to make the re-
2E
418 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
ductions desired in wine duties, and to pay 1,500,000 francs for claims
made by France. The amount promised was to be handed over in six
annual installments, the first to be paid a year after ratification,
which, as it turned out, was consummated February 2, 1832. In
this, as in the arrangement with England, we gave up some of our
demands, taking what we could get, and removing a long-standing
source of ill-feeling between the two powers.
But the matter was not entirely ended; for the French chambers
must appropriate the money for actual payment, and as the country's
revenues were much embarrassed, the money was not voted.
The Money The treaty was unpopular in France, spite of the advantage
Promptly ^ &ave tne wme growers 5 and so it happened that when
Paid. the first installment was due, no provisions had been made
to meet it. Jackson was himself scrupulously honest
in money matters, and considered the course of the French govern-
ment essentially dishonorable. He met it in a characteristic manner.
He ordered the secretary of the treasury to draw a draft on the
French treasury, placed it with the bank of the United States, which
sent it to Paris, where it was duly protested. Then came a sharp
conflict with Biddle, already at odds with the administration, who
demanded protest charges at the ordinary rate, amounting to nearly
$170,000. The demand from a bank having in hand many millions
of the public money was indignantly refused. Biddle replied by
holding back the disputed sum out of the dividends due the govern-
ment on its stock in the bank.
This controversy diverted attention for only a short time from the
issue between the president and France. Jackson was convinced
that nothing but a firm stand would bring the chambers
Stern to execute the treaty, and in his annual message of 1833
advocated ne recommended that congress authorize the seizure of
by Jackson, enough French property in our borders to satisfy our
claims. Such a course, if carried out, would mean war.
Probably it was only a threat; but the suggestion of it created a
storm of indignation in Paris. The French minister in Washington
was recalled, and Livingston, now in Paris, was informed that his
passports were at his disposal. A bill to vote the money was then
before the French legislature. After a long and angry debate it was
passed with the proviso that the money should not be paid until
Jackson's offending language was explained. At this
Livmgston withdrew from his post, leaving the office in
the hands of a charge d'affaires, who, when the ministry
still further refused to pay, closed his office and withdrew also.
This was November 8, 1835, and for a year we had no representative
in Paris.
For a while the American public expected war, but time brought
reflection. The point at issue was too trivial to justify hostilities,
THE DESIRE FOR TEXAS 419
for it was now only a question of words. Clay, leading as caustic
an opposition as that which embarrassed Adams in 1825-1829, carried
unanimously through the senate resolutions opposing
war. The campaign of 1836 was approaching, and that
also tended to moderate the attitude of the administration.
A further step was taken when in the annual message of 1835 the
president expressed the hope that France would pay the money and
so remove the obstacle to harmony between the two powers. Then
England offered her good services to bring the two states together.
Her advances were acceptable to both sides, and by the next spring
France had declared herseifcsajtisfied with the amicable words of the
message of 1835 and -four of the promised installments were paid.
Jackson's course had undoubtedly been abrupt, as was his nature ;
but it showed Europe that the American government could act en-
ergetically, and it thus strengthened our influence in many a court.
The third diplomatic problem arose in connection with Mexico.
The region now embraced generally in the states of Texas, New
Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, and California, and
a part of Colorado was in 1829 in the hands of the newly Mexico and
created federal republic of Mexico, which ruled its in- g.^n °fsse
habited parts as states and provinces. One of these Texas.
states was known as Coahuila and Texas, divided into
four departments, one of which was Texas. The state had a constitu-
tion of its own and exercised its functions under the authority of the
federal republic.
The department of Texas, vast and inviting, lay between the
Sabine and Nueces rivers. Under Spanish rule it contained a large
number of Indians and about 4000 white men, chiefly
in the region of San Antonio. Its fine lands early attracted
the adventurous land hunters of the East, and from 1821 Texas,
to 1827 there was a continuous stream of settlers from the
United States. Among them Stephen F. Austin, who led the first
colony, was the leading man. In 1832 arrived Samuel Houston, a
friend of Jackson, a distinguished soldier in the Creek war, formerly
a congressman and governor of Tennessee, who for personal reasons
wished to begin life in a new country. These two men played an
important role in the early history of Anglo-American Texas.
At first the Mexican authorities encouraged the immigration of men
from the East, giving them large grants of land ; but the community
showed much vigor, and the authorities began to fear Mexico
a movement for a separate state. It was probably this fears the
apprehension that caused them to attach Texas to the Growth of
distinctly Mexican state of Coahuila, giving it only one- Texas-
sixth of the representation in the state's legislature. But immigration
was steady, and the new arrivals numbered 15,000 by 1827 and about
30,000 in 1836. Then came efforts to restrict immigration. In
420 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
1829 the Mexican president, of his own unauthorized power, issued
an order abolishing slavery in the republic. As this institution
then existed only among the Anglo-American settlers of Texas,
the manifesto was construed as a blow at that community. Austin,
however, protested, and was able to secure a second order exempting
Texas from the operation of the first order. In 1830 came a Mexican
law forbidding further colonization from abroad and prohibiting the
subsequent introduction of slaves. The Texans saw in this a deliberate
attempt to check their growing power. They were not disposed to
abide by its purpose, and colonists and slaves were secretly received
in defiance of the weak central authority. From that time the Texans
began to dream of revolution with ultimate annexation to the United
States.
Meanwhile, the American government made an effort to purchase
Texas. Adams authorized our minister to Mexico to open negotia-
tions to that end, but the minister discovered so much
sensitiveness on the part of Mexico on the subject that he
buy Texas, did not press the matter. The southern republic was in
dire straights, one president after another overthrew his
predecessor only to be driven out by a more formidable rival, and each
had such an insecure hold on power that he dared not risk the dis-
pleasure of his country by consenting to a division of the republic's
domain. When Jackson became president, he took up the matter,
but met the same difficulties. His representative in Mexico, Colonel
Anthony Butler, was a shifty adventurer, suspected by the Mexicans,
and when he could accomplish nothing by direct diplomacy, he under-
took to gain his ends by corrupting some of the men nearest to the
Mexican president. His intrigues became known, and the only results
were to discredit Butler, who was duly recalled, and to create on the
part of the Mexicans a disgust for our diplomacy. It is fair to say
that Jackson was not a party to the trickery of his agent.
The story now returns to the Texans, who had come to believe
that they could escape the annihilation of their political rights only
through a revolution. The outbreak came in 1835,
The Texan ^e people rising to a man and driving the Mexican forces
1835-1836' beyond the Rio Grande within the space of two and a
half months. Then came a convention to form a civil
government, while arrangements went on to meet the counterstroke
which Mexico was sure to attempt. Never did the American stock
fight better than the Texans in the next three months. For a time
bravery seemed useless. The Texans were assembled in small bands
which fell singly before the army of several thousand with which
Santa Anna crossed the Rio Grande to crush the revolution. In
the early days of March, 1836, post after post was lost and the revolu-
tionists began to lose heart. But one small band of 183 under W. B.
Travis gave an evidence of courage and devotion which restored the
THE TEXAS REVOLUTION 421
spirits of the whole community and enabled it to make the united
stand which insured final success. They held the old fort of The
Alamo, at San Antonio, and refused to retreat, although more than
a thousand Mexicans under Santa Anna closed in around Th
them. After a thirteen-day siege all the defenders but
six fell at their posts before the place was taken by storm. The
remnant of survivors was shot by Santa Anna, spite of the protest
of some of his officers. This created great horror among the Texans,
and after that their battle cry was "Remember the Alamo !"
News that the Texans were struggling for liberty aroused great
sympathy in the United States. The Mississippi valley and the
Gulf states were most outspoken, but mass meetings
and contributions indicated the warm interest of the sea- Sympathy
board region as far north as Boston. Many boatloads Texan's,
of sympathizers sailed from New Orleans for Galveston.
In response to protests from Mexico, orders were given to stop all
volunteers for Texas, but the intercepted ones declared they were
colonists seeking homes in Texas and were allowed to pass freely.
Arrived at their destination, they at once joined the ranks of the
revolutionists, whose power of resistance thus increased daily.
After the first disastrous efforts to hold various disconnected
positions in the South, the Texan forces were united under General
Sam Houston, who, ever falling back, drew Santa Anna
far northward. For a time it seemed that all was lost,
but Houston only waited his opportunity. April 21 0^0,1836.
he turned on Santa Anna, who was overconfident and
unprepared, and crushed him in the battle of San Jacinto. The
Texans charged irresistibly, breaking the enemy's lines, shooting down
those who ran, and finally capturing all but fifty of the survivors
of the 1600 men who faced them in the beginning of the engagement.
Santa Anna himself was taken, and 630 of his followers were slain.
Two months later he secured his release by signing treaties in which
he and the other Mexican generals in Texas agreed to remove all their
troops and to endeavor to secure the independence of the country
with the bounds no farther south than the Rio Grande. This agree-
ment proved the actual achievement of Texan independence; for
although Mexico repudiated it and meant to reinvade the rebellious
region, she was so beset by internal struggles that Texas was left
undisturbed.
But the 30,000 inhabitants of the wide area between the Sabine
and the Nueces could not support the burden of its defense, and
appeals were made to the United States for annexation.
Jackson acted cautiously. Texas had made the preserva-
tion of slavery one of the grounds of revolution, and if Texas?
annexed it would be slave territory. The question imme-
diately became a sectional one. Calhoun and the South urged that
422 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
this vast region be acquired without delay. John Quincy Adams
and Webster both made speeches on the other side. Jackson was
bending all his efforts to carry the election of Van Buren and so
perpetuate his policy against the bank; and he was unwilling to
jeopardize party harmony by introducing the Texan question into
the campaign. Then it was urged that we recognize the republic
as independent. He disposed of this by sending a special agent
to Texas, who reported that the new republic could not
The Recog- sustam itself against its enemies. On this basis Jackson
Texas.0 advised congress that recognition should be deferred.
But in February, 1837, when it seemed that England
was about to grant recognition, he changed his attitude, and resolu-
tions favorable to Texas passed in each house, and the president sent
a minister. Annexation, however, must wait until another day.
THE END or JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY
Jackson and his party were now supreme in national politics. A
man of little education and not broadly informed in statecraft, he
nevertheless was trusted by the people, whose champion
sions Dm~ ke was* -^e kad an averaSe man's view of good govern-
ment and extraordinary ability to organize and rule a
party. The hopes of Clay, Webster, and Calhoun were reduced to
nullity by his success. The first and second, each a little suspicious
of the other, were holding together the Northern minority, which,
dropping the name national republican, now began to be known as
the whig party. It embraced avowedly the conservative and property-
holding class, and was in plain contrast with the democrats, who
declared themselves champions of the people. Many of the older
states retained a property qualification for voting and allowed the
legislature to select governors and judges. Such practices were
approved by the whigs, but the democrats considered them unequal
privileges, and demanded a wide popular participation of the people
in the government. Rotation in office, strict economy in expenditures,
and the least possible federal concentration were also
T.hea?D~bt fundamental principles of the democrats. In 1835 the
p^d last of the national debt was paid, much to the gratification
of Jackson, who, however, warned the country that this
ought not to be made the excuse for future extravagance.
Meanwhile, the position of Calhoun was singular. Committed
to state rights, and dependent upon South Carolina, he could not
find a place in the party of Webster and Clay ; nor could
Position'8 he return to the democrats while Jackson's influence
predominated. He was a democrat, but he led a small
faction at war with Jackson. In 1832 he had hopes of defeating
the nomination of Van Buren for vice-president, but failed signally.
BANKS OF DEPOSIT 423
Then he sought to embarrass the administration in its bank and other
policies, but he failed in this also. In some minor matters he played
a similar role with varying results. But his opportunity came with
the reviving importance of the slavery issue. By the most vigorous
appeals to the South he stimulated sectionalism, made a Southern
faction in the democratic party, and laid the train that led to seces-
sion. Jackson understood this purpose and foresaw its results long
before the. country could see them. With characteristic warmth
he pronounced Calhoun a traitor, bent on disrupting the democratic
party, whose integrity, said Jackson, was the best guaranty against
disunion.
While the democrats saw the opposing factions thus arrayed, they
had to give strict attention to domestic finances. The twenty-three
"pet banks," as they were dubbed, which received the
public money after October i, 1833, were selected with all
possible care, but it was impossible to keep political
motives entirely in the background. They were denounced by the
whigs as unsafe, and their notes, with which the government paid
some of its bills, frequently were less than par. This led to a new
act in 1836, imposing stricter conditions for the selection of such
banks of deposits, requiring them to furnish security, and to redeem
their notes in specie. The payment of the national debt, and the
steady increase of the revenues, resulted in a surplus of government
funds, and it was so profitable for a bank to have the deposits that
pressure was brought on the treasury to include other banks in the
list. Thus it happened that in 1836 the number of "pet banks"
was 89, with total deposits of nearly $50,000,000.
Along with this development went a wide expansion in the volume
of bank notes. Thoughtful people foresaw that in an emergency
these notes could not be redeemed in specie, and a demand
arose for laws which would force more gold and silver Attempt to
into circulation. The demand came most loudly from force Specie
Senator Benton, of Missouri, who for his part in this ^io Cir-
movement got the nickname of "Old Bullion." The culation-
result of the agitation was laws to make foreign gold and
silver coins legal tender and a law to change the ratio of gold and silver
so as to allow free coinage of the former, which at the old ratio was
more valuable than silver. Under the last law $1,500,000 in gold
was coined by the mint. Democratic orators provided themselves
with green silken mesh purses through which shining yellow coins,
popularly called "Benton's mint drops" could be seen, and these
were ostentatiously displayed in taverns and on the stump in illustra-
tion of the politicians' arguments for what they called the "currency
of the constitution." Attempts were made to make bills of less
value than five dollars no longer legal tender, in the hope that the
vacuum thus created in the currency would force the ingress of specie
424 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
from abroad. At that time we mined little of either precious metal
and were dependent on importations. All these well-meant attempts
to establish a hard-money currency accomplished little. LocaV
banks, protected by state law, existed everywhere, and the country
was full of their bills. The whigs cast derision on all that was done.
They wished to prolong the existing confusion in the hope that it
would make necessary the recharter of the bank of the United States,
which they asserted was the only way out of the country's financial
bewilderment.
Another evil of the day was the accumulation of a government
surplus of many millions after the payment of the debt of the nation.
It could not be reduced by lowering the tariff, since the
?he ^s^" comPromise tariff of 1833 was to run through ten years,
plusRev-r~ until I&42. No better method of disposing of it was
enue. suggested than to deposit it with the states. Jackson
in the beginning of his presidency favored the suggestion,
but soon changed his mind. He came to believe that the consti-
tution did not authorize such a use of public money. On the other
hand, the measure was favored by Clay, who was not embarrassed
by similar constitutional views. He thought the principle might
be applied to the proceeds of the land sales, since the land belonged
to all the states. In 1832 he carried through both houses a bill for
such a distribution, but it was given a "pocket veto" by Jackson,
who thought a better way would be to sell the lands more cheaply, a
plan which pleased the West greatly. In fact, it was a perilous thing to
lead the states to look to the federal government as a source of largesses.
But the surplus continued to grow, and in 1835 Clay carried another
distribution bill through the senate. So strong was opinion for it
that the administration became alarmed and introduced
TheDistri- into the house a slightly different bill, which, it was said,
button Act 111 TI-I-I T 'it
of 1836. would be accepted by Jackson. It was carried through
both houses with a rush, and was approved by the president
June 23, 1836. It did not give, but loaned, the surplus to the states
and provided that all the surplus in the treasury on January i, 1837,
above $5,000,000 should be deposited with the states in four equal
quarterly installments according to federal population. The money
thus deposited might formally be demanded for repayment at the
discretion of congress, but it was understood that no such demand
would ever be made. Jackson accepted the bill with great reluctance,
and he said plainly it should not be a precedent. He yielded, undoubt-
edly, because the measure was very popular, and because he feared
a veto would imperil the election of Van Buren, whose success he
believed of supreme importance. As it turned out, $36,000,000
was on hand to be distributed, and the first and second installments
were paid and half of the third; but the panic of 1837 then inter-
vened, and there was no money in the treasury to pay the rest.
ELECTION OF 1836 425
The last notable incident of his administration was the specie
circular, issued July n, 1836. The West was carried away with
land speculation. Here, too, were a large number of
insecure banks, whose notes were being received in pay- The Specie
ment for lands. It was evident that the bubble must x£g **'
soon burst; for the lands could not go on increasing
in value, speculators in them would fail, and the banks from which
they had borrowed would be embarrassed and cease to pay their
notes in specie. The result would be that the government in such
a contingency would find its hands full of worthless paper money
and the loss would be immense. Jackson, therefore, ordered land
offices to take no money but specie. For a time there was a
feverish movement of gold and silver to the West, but soon that failed.
Then creditors of the Western banks began to demand specie
of them. Thus came the panic of 1837. The specie circular
did not produce this crisis, as the whigs charged, but it hastened its
coming.
While these 'things happened, the country came to the election
of 1836. Jackson was supreme in his party and was able to dominate
it, though he did so by the most wanton exercise of his
personal will. May 20, 1835, more than a year before fg^jhl
the election was to come, a convention, half of it office- Democrats
holders, met in Baltimore and nominated Van Buren
for president and R. M. Johnson, of Kentucky, for vice-president.
Outside the convention was much party dissatisfaction with the
nomination, but no one dared oppose the will of Jackson. Van
Buren, accepting the proffered honor, said he would " tread generally
in the footsteps of General Jackson," a sentiment which received
much ridicule from his opponents.
The whigs were not strong enough tc carry one man through
triumphantly, but they hoped to take advantage of the dissatis-
faction among their opponents and throw the election TheWhi
into the house, where they expected to defeat the demo-
cratic candidate. They, therefore, held no convention, united with
all the malcontents, and sought to win a total majority for three men.
In the Northeast they supported Webster, whom the Massachusetts
whigs nominated. In the Northwest they united on General W. H.
Harrison, and in the Southwest on Senator White, of Tennessee,
nominated by the legislature of his own state. Ohio had her own
candidate, Judge John McLean, who was popular with the remnant
of the antimasonic party. South Carolina would support none of
the candidates ; and she was especially opposed to Van Buren, whose
intrigue had prostrated her champion, Calhoun.
The result was a surprise to the whigs. Van Buren received 1 70 elec-
toral votes against 1 24 for all his opponents and was declared elected.
Johnson had only 147 against a combined opposition of 147 and
426 JACKSON'S PRESIDENCY COMPLETED
was, therefore, not elected. For the only time in our history the
senate was to choose a vice-president, the choice being Johnson
by a vote of 33 to 16. Of the defeated candidates
Results! Harrison had 73 votes, White had 26, among them the
votes of Tennessee, Webster had the 14 votes of Massa-
chusetts, and the 1 1 votes of South Carolina were thrown away on Willie
P. Mangum, of North Carolina. As the democrats maintained their
control of each branch of congress, Jackson retired from office, assured
that the bank would not be rechartered and the great democratic
principles for which he had striven would be perpetuated. He closed
his labors with a " Farewell Address," in which he summed up the chief
features of his political faith. He retired to his home at the "Her-
mitage," near Nashville, saying: "When I review the arduous
administration through which I have passed, the formidable opposi-
tion, to its very close, of the combined talents, wealth, and power of
the whole aristocracy of the United States, aided as it is by the monied
monopolies of the whole country with their corrupting influence,
with which we had to contend, I am truly thankful to my God for
this happy result."
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The general works, biographies, works of leading men, and legislative and exec-
utive sources are the same as for the preceding chapter (see page 405). The special
topics treated in this chapter and the leading works on them are as follows :
On Nullification : Houston, Nullification in South Carolina (Harvard Historical
Studies, 1896) ; Phillips, Georgia and State Rights (Am. Hist. Assn. Reports, 1901,
vol. II) ; Ames, State Documents on Federal Relations, vol. IV (1902) ; Jervey,
Robert Y. Hayne and His Time (1909) ; Stille, Life and Services of Joel R. Poinsett
(1888) ; Powell, Nullification and Secession (1897) ; Bassett, Life of Andrew Jack-
son, vol. II (1911); Sumner, Life of Andrew Jackson (ed. of 1897); Calhoun,
Works, 6 vols. (1853-1855) ; Jameson, ed., Correspondence of Calhoun (Am. Hist.
Assn. Report, vol. II, 1899).
On Jackson's attack on the bank of the United States : Catterall, The Second
Bank of the United States (1903) ; Dewey, The Second United States Bank (National
Monetary Commission Report, 1910) ; Ibid., Financial History of the United States
(1903) ; Sumner, History of Banking in the United States (vol. I of History of Bank-
ing in All the Leading Nations, 1896) ; White, Money and Banking (26. ed., 1902) ;
Bassett, Life of Andrew Jackson, vol. II (1911) ; Sumner, Andrew Jackson (revised
ed., 1897) ; Clark and Hall, Legislative and Documentary History of the Bank of
the United States (1832) ; Gallatin, Considerations on the Currency (1831), and other
references in Catterall, Second Bank, pages 513-526.
On the tariff controversy see : Taussig, Tariff History of the United States (ed.
of 1898), opposes protection; Stan wood, American Tariff Controversies, 2 vols.
(1903), favors protection; Curtiss, Protection and Prosperity (1896), favors protec-
tion and contains list of tariff measures; Bishop, History of American Manufac-
tures, 3 vols. (1867) ; Michael and Pulsifer, compilers, Tariff Acts Passed by the
Congress ojthe United States, 1789-1895 (1896).
On foreign affairs see American State Papers, Foreign for the important docu-
ments; Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vols. II and III (1902),
contains papers on the relations with France ; Bassett, Life of Andrew Jackson,
vol. II (1911), summarizes foreign affairs; Sumner, A ndrew Jackson (isted., 1886),
contains summary of relations with Great Britain; and Schuyler, American Di-
plomacy (1886), good for commercial negotiations.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
427
On Texas, its early history and relations with the United States, see Garrison,
Texas, a Contest of Civilizations (1903), the best short history; Ibid., ed., Texan
Diplomatic Correspondence, 2 vols. (Am. Hist. Assn. Reports, 1907 and 1908) ;
Rather, The Annexation of Texas (Texas Hist. Assn. Quarterly, 1910) ; and Reeves,
Diplomacy under Tyler and Polk (1907).
For Independent Reading
Mrs. Trollope, Domestic Manners of the Americans (1832); Dickens, American
Notes (many editions) ; Fanny Kemble [Butler], Journal, 2 vols. (1832-1833)-, and
Dodd, Statesmen of the Old South (1911), treats of Jefferson, Calhoun, and Jefferson
Davis.
CHAPTER XXI
EARLY PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY, 1831-1850
THE ANTISLAVERY AGITATION
Two phases of antislavery agitation occurred in the United States
during the nineteenth century, one pacific and intended to persuade
the South that slavery should be given up, the other
Mov JW° seeking to induce the North to use her influence in congress
ments. to wipe out what was considered a blot on American
civilization. Of the first movement Benjamin Lundy,
a New Jersey Quaker, was the leading spirit. He was persistent
and patient, and wished to secure the cooperation of slaveholders,
who generally feared that antislavery agitation would suggest insur-
rection to the minds of the slaves. He traveled extensively in the
South, organized emancipation societies, and published a paper,
The Genius of Universal Emancipation, as a means of
promoting his ideas. He met no opposition from South-
erners, but succeeded only in the sections in which there
were few slaveholders, and chiefly with his fellow Quakers. His
period of activity extended from about 1815 to 1831.
In 1816, while his movement was still in its hopeful stage, the
American Colonization Society was founded. Its first president
was Bushrod Washington, a justice of the supreme court,
American an(j Qav ancj manv other prominent men gave it support.
Colonization rr,, , . J A , J ^ , . ^l
Society. -^ne object was to promote emancipation by sending the
freedmen to Africa ; for it was believed that slaveholders
would emancipate more readily if the emancipated ones were returned
to their original homes. To aid its operations the government in
1822 established the colony of Liberia, on the west coast of Africa,
and branch colonization societies north and south collected money
to sustain it. By 1830 the society had sent 1162 negroes to Liberia,
most of whom fell victims to the pestilential fevers of the place.
At that time it was evident that colonization, like emancipation
by persuasion of the masters, was a failure. The truth is that the
expansion of cotton farming and the consequent rise
of the prices of slaves were increasing the hold of slavery
tude of the . 0^1 <• o i j
South. m tiie boutn. A new generation of southerners had
grown up since 1800. They had not the zeal for human
rights so prevalent in revolutionary days and they were eager to
develop their immense regions of fertile lands. To such men the
428
THE WORK OF GARRISON 429
negro, who accepted bondage easily, seemed happier in slavery than
out of it ; and so it came about that most conscientious men in the
South, while recognizing the harshness of slavery, eventually came
to consider it fixed in Southern life. The efforts of Northern men to
remove it seemed to them mischievous interference with Southern
affairs, a course likely to lead to insurrection and massacre.
The second movement originated in 1831 when William Lloyd Garri-
son began to publish the Liberator in Boston. He was young, poor,
and friendless, but a passionate hatred of slavery filled
his heart. He had been imprisoned in Baltimore for an ^f^f111
article in Lundy's paper, and the remembrance of it Garrison,
whetted his purpose. "I shall contend for the immediate
enfranchisement of our slave population," he said; "I will be as
harsh as truth and as uncompromising as justice on this subject — I
do not wish to think, or speak, or write with moderation — I am
in earnest — I will not equivocate — I will not retreat a single inch,
and I will be heard t" Drawing to himself the more earnest opponents
of slavery in New England he was soon a power in the land. Local
societies were founded, money was raised by contributions, fairs,
and other means, and then he proceeded to unite the local societies
into a common organization. In 1832 was formed the New England
Antislavery Society, and in 1833 the American Antislavery Society.
The object was to oppose slavery in every possible manner. In
1840 there were 2000 local organizations, with a total membership
of nearly 200,000. Soon after its origin this phase of the antislavery
movement began to be called "abolitionism."
While Boston remained the center of abolitionism in the East.
Oberlin, Ohio, became the center in the West. This village was
founded around a coeducational school in 1833. In
1835 it received an accession of three professors and Oberlin and
thirty students from Lane Theological Seminary, Cincin- *^ Aboii-
nati, all abolitionists who had left Lane Seminary because tionists.
it frowned on their opinions. Oberlin college was incor-
porated, and negro students were admitted to its courses. The
village became an important point for Western abolitionists. A
leading Ohio abolitionist was James G. Birney, who had left Kentucky
because he was opposed for teaching the doctrine of freedom.
About this time appeared the " underground railway," conducted
by abolitionists to help slaves to escape from the South. "Stations"
were formed at regular distances at the homes of trusted
persons, called "agents," while other persons, known as JJ* "^^
"conductors," went South and escorted fugitives secretly Railway?"
from "station" to "station" until safety was reached
at last in a free state or in Canada. The persons connected with the
"underground railway" were men of great probity in ordinary
matters, but they thought it no crime to snatch a slave from bond-
430 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
age. It is estimated that 2000 slaves a year thus escaped from
their masters from 1830 to 1860. By such means as these the
abolitionists attracted a great deal of attention, exasperated the
Southerners to the point of fury, and called the attention of
Northern people to the harshness of slavery. Their efforts at first
were denounced by most people in the North, and sometimes their
meetings were violently broken up, but opinion there gradually
changed, so that the Northerners, by 1850, would do nothing to
aid masters in recovering runaway slaves.
Let us look at the other side of the picture. In 1831 the South
was probably ' already more proslavery than in 1800. It received
the Garrisonian movement with violent scorn. Many
South m bitter things were said about those who would recklessly
incite the slaves to murder their masters. The "black
terror" was ever the nightmare of the community. In 1831 Nat
Turner, a black slave in Southampton county, Virginia, began an
insurrection, killing sixty whites before he was captured and hanged.
It was believed he had read the literature of the abolitionists. The
incident sent a shock of horror throughout the South. Out of the shock
came the motions in the Virginia legislature to abolish slavery, and
a great debate followed in the succeeding winter. But no one could
suggest a satisfactory way of disposing of the freedmen, and all the
discussion came to naught. Virginia was not willing to have the
negro population freed and left within the state. The upshot was
to convince the South that the blacks were a fixed part
Black Code*1 of *ts P°Pulation ancl tnat if theY remained, they could
be best controlled as slaves. From that time the negro's
lot became harder. Laws were passed to forbid his instruction in
reading and writing, his free use of the roads, his preaching to his
own people, his right to assemble in meetings of any kind where no
white man was present, and whatever else might enable him to com-
bine for any action which might lead to freedom. This new " black
code" now became common to all the Southern states, and by 1860
the negro was completely cowed. As abolition gained in the North,
proslavery gained in the South. In 1800 Southern statesmen and
preachers generally considered slavery an evil, though they knew
not how to remedy it : in 1860 Southerners of both classes were found
who argued that slavery was a blessing to the negro, a benefit to the
South, and a beneficent institution whereby peace and happiness
was established for society.
This growing division between the sections soon found expression
in congress. Southerners were alarmed when abolition
Antislavery literature began to be sent South, some of it to ne-
Mails6 8roes> and in 1835 a great group of indignant citizens
of Charleston, South Carolina, seized and burned a mass
of such papers before they were delivered. Appeals were sent to the
THE "GAG RULE" 431
postmaster-general to refuse the use of the mails for such purposes.
He did not think such action legal, and a compromise was reached
by which abolition papers were to be accepted by postmasters when
offered for mailing, but need not be delivered at the offices to which
they were directed. Then Calhoun offered a bill in the senate to
forbid sending antislavery literature through the mails to places in
which it might not lawfully circulate; but the proposition received
an adverse vote. The incident attracted much attention, and that
helped the abolitionists in the North.
Much more excitement was aroused a few months later by the
attitude of the house of representatives toward antislavery peti-
tions. Many such appeals had come to the house in recent
years, and they were beginning to irritate Southern
members. Yet the number of petitions did not diminish ;
for the abolitionists got them signed more with the purpose of giving
their efforts a definite form than with the expectation of success in
the object asked for. Finally on May 26, 1836, the house 'resolved
that such memorials in the future be tabled without reading or other
action on them. John Quincy Adams, now a member of the house,
protested against the resolution as unconstitutional, and a violation
of the rights of his constituents. The abolitionists could now say
the right of petition, the ancient bulwark of liberty, was denied, and
more memorials than ever were sent to Washington. Adams took upon
himself the task of presenting them. Whenever the regular hour for
petitions arrived, he could be seen at his desk in the house, a huge pile
of papers before him. As the order of the day was announced, he would
rise with words like these: "I hold in my hands a request from
citizens of the town of - — praying the abolition of slavery in ."
At this point the hammer of the speaker would fall, and Adams would
be declared out of order. Not abashed, he would take another paper
from the pile, begin with the same words, only to be cut off in the
same manner, proceeding thus until the pile was exhausted. His
action made him very unpopular with Southern members, but he
became the honored champion of the abolitionists. At last the friends
of slavery came to see that the "gag rule" in regard to
petitions but strengthened the abolitionists in their
appeals to the North, and in December, 1844, the offending
rule was repealed. In resenting an irritating practice
of the abolitionists the Southern members had put themselves in the
wrong and given their adversaries a point to support the general
argument that slavery tinged with cruelty and despotism whatever
it touched.
432 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
VAN BUREN'S PRESIDENCY
Van Buren became president through the grace of Andrew Jackson.
He had all the virtues of mediocrity without the capacity of leadership.
He was honest, cool-headed, courteous to his contem-
ofVan0*61 Planes, and loyal to his cause. He favored economy
Buren. m expenditures, and although the spoils system throve dur-
ing his administration, he sought to secure efficient persons
for the offices within his gift. He was an intimate friend of the
New York literary men of his day, and appointed Paulding, the
novelist, secretary of the navy. His weakness was that he had not
the capacity of command, and his party, no longer restrained by
the strong will of Jackson, fell into confusion and lost the confidence
of the country.
The first incident in his administration was the panic of 1837,
symptoms of which began to appear before he was inaugurated. The
cause was overspeculation, chiefly in the newer parts
1*837° its of the country- The Past six years had been a period
Cause. °f great confidence everywhere. Railroads were being
built, immigrants were buying land at rapid advances,
banks were lending money far in excess of their means, cotton rose
to sixteen cents a pound in 1835 and fell to ten cents in 1836, " wild-
cat banks" were incorporated whose chief activity was to issue money
to the land speculators, and the whole industrial community lived
on the expectation that the morrow would carry the wave of specula-
tion higher than it was to-day. Only a slight shock was needed to
hurl the whole structure to the ground.
Two things operating jointly served to furnish this check. The
specie circular of 1836 (see page 425) forced land buyers to pay in
specie, they asked the Western banks for gold and silver
Circular"6 ^ redemption of notes, and the institutions which had
most overissued began to suspend specie payment. The
distribution of the surplus (see page 424), beginning in January,
1837, drew money from the deposit banks to transfer it to other
places. This necessitated the calling in of loans, which
butior^ofthe ^mPn'ed the suspension of industrial development, and
Surplus. " tne reaction reached the remotest point of the country's
business life. Then demoralization quickly arrived.
European holders sent back bonds and demanded cash, owners of
specie locked it in vaults, importations of goods fell off, and the
public revenues ceasing, the government expenses used up the treas-
ury's surplus so that the third installment of the deposits was sus-
pended when only half of it had been distributed.
So acute was the situation that congress was called in extra session
in October. Though the government was out of debt, it had no
A BANK OR A SUB-TREASURY? 433
money for its expenses, and since the law required public dues to be
paid in specie or in notes of specie-paying banks, there was not
enough currency in the treasury to enable it to carry on its busi-
ness. The first thing, therefore, was to issue temporarily
$10,000,000 in treasury notes. Van Buren was urged to ^nEixtra
repeal the specie circular, but refused steadfastly. The congress
whigs declared that all the trouble came from the destruc-
tion of the bank of the United States and hoped to carry a bill for
recharter, but congress and president remained firm, and this demand
failed.
Then Van Buren brought forward a plan to have the government
take care of the deposits, known later as the sub-treasury bill.
Let the government, he said, keep its own money, leaving it with
the treasurer, the mints, postmasters, collectors, and other
receivers until it was ordered paid out. At once arose
a cry that these keepers were not responsible, and that
the scheme, if adopted, would dangerously enlarge the
patronage. The whigs hoped the distress would make a new bank
seem necessary, and voted steadily against the sub-treasury. The
democrats were divided ; one part, strong in the Eastern cities, opposing
the suggestion as unsafe, and the other supporting it. The second
faction called itself the antimonopolists, but it was generally known
as the "Locofocos," a nickname given by its enemies in New York.
In the popular parlance of the day the sub-treasury bill was "the
divorce bill," because it sought to "divorce the government from
all banks." It failed in the extra session, came up in a simpler form
in 1838, but was again lost. It was taken up again and
successfully passed and signed July 4, 1840. When finally ^8d4°opte
passed, it created sub-treasuries to keep and pay out the
public money at Boston, New York, Philadelphia, St. Louis, and
New Orleans, which, with the treasury at Washington left the funds
in six important centers of business. It also provided that after
the end of June, 1843, only specie should be received for public dues.
The whigs fought the bill to the last, for its adoption meant the
relinquishment of their hope for a bank; they repealed it in 1841,
in the first days of their triumph, but the democrats restored it in
1846, omitting the specie feature.
Before this law was passed, the presidential campaign of 1840 was
being conducted. Van Buren's nomination by his party was easily
secured in a convention at Baltimore, May 4, 1840.
Several states had named candidates for the vice-presi- f^01
dency, and the convention thought it best to refrain from
deciding between them. It was probably expected that the choice
would at last fall to the senate. A platform strong in Jacksonian
principles was adopted as the ground on which the country should
continue to manifest its confidence in the existing administration.
2 F
434 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
The whigs approached the election year in high spirits. The long
period of financial stringency, the inability of the democrats to unite
on a positive remedy, and the many opponents of Van Buren in his
party indicated that the democrats would have strong opposition.
Clay saw the situation and had high hopes. It seemed that his oppor-
tunity was at last at hand. The convention was called at Harrisburg,
December 4, 1839. As the time approached, a strong anti-Clay
opposition appeared within the party. He was a mason, he had
spoken against the abolitionists, and he was already twice defeated
for the presidency. These facts, it was urged, made him an unavail-
able candidate, and Harrison, leading whig candidate in 1836, was
pointed out as a stronger man. The opponents of Clay were well
led by Thurlow Weed, party manager in the important state of New
York. When the convention met, Clay had 102 votes on the first
ballot, mostly from the slaveholding states, Harrison had 91, and
General Winfield Scott had 57. Scott was a stalking-horse for Clay's
enemies, who now began to shift their support to Harrison, with the
result that the latter was finally named. Clay, deeply disappointed,
burst into a rage when he learned the news. Walking rapidly to and
fro, in a group of his friends, he exclaimed, "If there were two Henry
Clays, one of them would make the other president !" John Tyler,
of Virginia, deeply attached to the defeated leader, was nominated
for vice-president. No platform was adopted, for in the groups of
men supporting the action of the convention were so many of con-
flicting views that it was perilous to attempt to devise a body of prin-
ciples on which they should appeal to the people. The whigs were con-
tent to rest their fate on the cry of " Down with Van Buren ! "
No one doubted how New England and the bank men outside of
it would vote, but it was not certain what the rest of the country
would do. Fortunately for the whigs the campaign had
Tippe" hardly opened when a lucky accident showed how they
Tyler Too." could be reached. A disappointed friend of Clay was
heard to say that Harrison, whose talents were very limited,
if given a pension and a barrel of hard cider would retire to his log
cabin and think no more of the presidency. The democrats seized
on the remark and dubbed Harrison the " log-cabin candidate." But
the blow reacted. The whigs made it a symbol of honor, saying it
showed that their candidate was a man of the people, disdained by the
aristocrats, whose heads were turned by their long lease of power.
At every political meeting of the whigs a log cabin, a jug of cider, and
a coon were displayed as tokens of their candidate's love of the people.
A popular song lauding him as the "hero of Tippecanoe" also did
much to create enthusiasm for his cause. This wave of popular ex-
citement accomplished the object for which it was raised, and in the
final test Harrison and Tyler, "Tippecanoe and Tyler too," were
chosen by 234 to 60 electoral votes. Van Buren lost his own state
TYLER AND CLAY 435
and carried only Virginia, South Carolina, Missouri, Alabama, Arkan-
sas, Illinois, and New Hampshire.
This overwhelming victory resulted fatally for the victor. Duly
inaugurated in March, 1841, he was at once overwhelmed by a horde
of hungry whig office seekers, who dogged his steps,
exhausted his strength, and so disturbed his peace of mind Harrison
that he yielded to an attack of pneumonia one month after
he took the oath of office. One of his last acts was to call congress in
extra session for May 31, 1841. When it met, Tyler was president.
THE ADMINISTRATION OF TYLER
Tyler now found himself at the head of a party with which he had
little political sympathy. He believed in state rights, opposed a bank
and a high tariff, and had only left the democratic fold
because he resented the towering methods of Jackson,
His nomination had been made without the slightest
expectation that he would ever be in a position to veto a bill which
the whigs had carried through congress.
On the other hand, Clay, the real head of the party, was in no mood
to resign his leadership. Harrison, had he lived, would have had
a sharp struggle with this imperious man, who was not ,
disposed to bow before so insignificant a figure as Tyler. Attitude
When, therefore, the extra session began, Clay, a member
of the senate, took charge of the situation like a military commander.
He offered a resolution specifying what work the extra session should
perform, the chief features being : the repeal of the sub-treasury act,
the incorporation of a bank, the enactment of a higher tariff law, and
the distribution of the proceeds of land sales. Tyler was very cautious,
but he was also stubborn, and Clay's dashing assumption of power
aroused him. He accepted a bill to abolish the sub-treasury, but
sent back with a veto a bill to incorporate a great bank in
the District of Columbia with branches in the states.
The whigs had a safe majority in each housej but they Question.
could not pass a bill over a veto. They were greatly dis-
appointed; for hearing rumors of Tyler's objections they thought
they had eliminated from their bill all the features to which he was
opposed. Smothering their resentment outwardly, they conferred
with the president to know what kind of a bank bill he would approve.
What he said became later a matter of dispute, but they hastily
prepared a charter for a " Fiscal Corporation," passed it without
difficulty, and sent it to the president. Tyler had expressed his op-
position to the word "bank," and so the word was not used. The
bill was said to have been shown to the president and to have had his
approval. Great was the anger of its friends, therefore, when it
came back in six days with a veto. Many had expected such action,
436 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
spite of his previous approval ; for the second bill differed from the
first in little but the names it gave to bank and branches. Under it
the great institution would have been able to do most of the things
which Jackson had found so distasteful. Both vetoes showed that
Tyler was fundamentally opposed to a bank on constitutional grounds.
He had evidently tried hard to reconcile his desire for party harmony
with his long-proclaimed principles, but the badly veiled discourtesy
of Clay and other leading whigs in setting him aside as leader had
wounded his pride and made him feel disposed to show them that he
was still president. While the second veto was being prepared, con-
gress passed a bill to distribute among the states the proceeds of land
sales. Tyler accepted the bill, but it was repealed in the following year.
The " Fiscal Corporation" was vetoed on September 9, 1841. Two
days later all the cabinet but Webster, secretary of state, resigned
as a token of their disapproval. They published letters
Tucratr<i" denouncing what they declared Tyler's false conduct,
by the** an(* Clay, wishing to detach as many whigs as possible
Whigs. from the administration, secured a caucus of the leading
members of the party which solemnly declared that "all
political connection between them and John Tyler was at an end."
Webster also gave reasons for his conduct, saying that he did not
think it wise to leave the cabinet without giving the president time
to select another secretary. Negotiations pending for the determina-
tion of the Northeast boundary made it desirable that he should
remain in office. He was not on good terms with Clay, and resented
the manner in which that leader sought to bend the whigs to his will.
Tyler saw in this a good omen. He hoped to build up a party in
which the dashing Kentuckian should not be supreme, and immediately
filled the cabinet with men who, like himself, had once been Jack-
sonians, but who had left the democratic fold because they did not like
the Jacksonian rule. As a party move, the step was a failure. Even
Webster soon came to realize that Tyler was not the man to lead the
whigs, and in May, 1843, when the administration was leaning strongly
toward the annexation of Texas, he also withdrew from the cabinet.
The only other distinctly whig measure passed through congress
during Tyler's presidency was the tariff of 1842. The term through
which the compromise of 1833 was to run was to expire
of 1842. June 31' I^42- Before that date the treasury had a defi-
cit. There was much alarm for the future, and some
attempts were made to devise a plan for relief; but the president
stood by the compromise of 1833, and it was allowed to run its course.
Finally, on August 30, 1842, a bill was passed fixing the duties on most
articles at the rates in force in 1832, and the president gave it his
approval. It involved the repeal of the distribution act of the pre-
vious year, and on that ground received enough democratic votes to
pass the senate.
MAINE THREATENS WAR 437
THE MAINE BOUNDARY AND THE WEBSTER-ASHBURTON TREATY
When Webster decided to remain in the cabinet in 1841 he had
begun important negotiations with England. The treaty of 1783
provided that the Northeast boundary should begin at
the mouth of the St. Croix river, follow its course to the
source, thence due north to the highlands separating the
tributaries of the St. Lawrence from the streams that flowed into
the Atlantic, along the said highlands to the source of the Connecticut,
thence with that river to the parallel 45° north, and thence due west
to the St. Lawrence. The commissioners knew little about the real
geography of the Northeast. There were several rivers which the
early inhabitants had called the St. Croix, and the British naturally
claimed that the westernmost should be taken for the true starting
point, while the Americans held for the easternmost. From the source
of the stream claimed by the British a northward line reached the
eastern end of some hills running westward, which it was claimed were
the highlands which ought to be accepted as the boundary. The
Americans were sure that the real St. Croix was either the river now
known as the St. Johns or a smaller stream called by the Indians the
Magaguadavi, about twenty-five miles east of the present St. Croix.
A line due north from the source of that stream did not touch the
hills just mentioned, but passed on through level country, across the
St. Johns, until it reached high ground which paralleled the St. Law-
rence, about 140 miles northward, and following these hills south-
westwardly this boundary gave to the United States about 12,000
square miles of territory more than that conceded by the British line.
This disputed region was drained in part by the Aroostook river,
which flows into the St. Johns, and whose valley by 1840 was being
settled by inhabitants of Maine. Various attempts to determine
the rights of each nation in the matter had been made, but none
succeeded. Maine meanwhile exercised jurisdiction over the Aroo-
stook lands, frequently driving out persons cutting timber under
Canadian authority. In 1838 the intruders were more numerous
than ever, and Governor Fairfield, of Maine, sent 150 men to oust
them. The intruders fell back to New Brunswick, gathered ree'n-
forcements, and only the exercise of moderation on the part of the gov-
ernor of New Brunswick prevented bloodshed. Through-
out Maine was great indignation, and the president was
called on for help. Van Buren advised negotiations, but
congress with practical unanimity gave him the authority to call out
50,000 men to defend the rights of the country, if he thought force
necessary. Several irritating incidents had recently occurred on the
Canadian frontier, and the country was in no friendly mood toward
Great Britain. At this time the English and American governments
438 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
agreed to desist from further operation on the Aroostook, and Maine,
already prepared to enforce her claim by force, was induced to with-
hold her hand until diplomacy had its opportunity. This period of
disturbance was popularly called the "Aroostook war."
Such was the situation when Webster became secretary of state
in 1841. He immediately opened negotiations with England, which
had no other wish than to dispose of the Aroostook inci-
Condude? ^ent witnout injury to her rights. Lord Ashburton,
a reasonable and courteous diplomatist, was sent to Wash-
ington to have special charge of the British side of the case, and on
August 9, 1842, the Webster-Ashburton treaty was signed, disposing
of the controversy through a compromise satisfactory to all moderate
persons. It adopted a line which gave 7015 square miles of the dis-
puted area, including the Aroostook valley, to the United States.
The treaty also pledged the two contracting powers to keep a joint
squadron in African waters to suppress the slave trade. Maine and
Massachusetts received from the United States money payments for
land claims they had in the region awarded to England. A British
map not accessible to Webster in 1842 supports the American claim
and makes it evident that England gained by the treaty 5000 square
miles more than the treaty of 1783 allowed her.
THE ANNEXATION or TEXAS AND THE OCCUPATION OF OREGON
During Van Buren's administration the annexation of Texas was
held in abeyance. The South desired it, but the North was sure to
object, and the question was too dangerous to party
The Situa- harmony to be taken up as long as it could be avoided.
Texas! Texas herself understood the situation, and after 1838
ceased to offer herself where there was no prospect that
she would be accepted. Meanwhile, she had many difficulties. Im-
migration was not very rapid, the struggle for independence over,
many of her adventurers returned to the United States, and the ex-
pense of keeping an army and navy to repel Mexico but added to her
heavy debt. She was in need of foreign assistance, and some of her
people were showing a willingness to accept it from any available
source.
In 1843 Washington learned that England and France had induced
Mexico to make a truce with Texas with a view to a permanent treaty.
Our government was surprised that these European
^eJA^eged nations were taking such active interest in Texan affairs.
Scheme. Then came reports that England was to advance money
to free the slaves in Texas, the republic guarantee-
ing the interest on the loan. Why was Great Britain, it was asked,
concerning herself in this quarter ? The answer was in order that she
might have the trade of Texas and secure a vast source for the supply
A TREATY OF ANNEXATION 439
of cotton she needed for her factories. Moreover, it was evident that
if she got as strong a hold over the country as this plan involved,
nothing but a war would shake her off. The report, although denied
by the British government, was credited in the South and by many
people in the North, and the impression grew that if we did not wish
to see this valuable region slip out of our grasp, we must act at once.
The North, however, laughed at the rumors and declared they were
manufactured to influence the action of congress. Later investiga-
tions have made it clear that they were well founded, although Eng-
land's activity had not gone as far by 1843 as the Southerners believed.
Tyler and Upshur, his secretary of state, believed the reports and
suggested to the Texans that it would be well to renew offers of an-
nexation. Samuel Houston, the Texan president, assumed
indifference, saying that if negotiations were now reopened Tyler sug- .
the newly established friendship of Texas and England «ests.An
would be weakened. This whetted the desire of Tyler,
and he consulted with his friends and satisfied himself that a treaty
of annexation could be carried through the senate. He took a warmer
tone with Houston, who at last offered to treat for annexation if the
United States would send an army to the frontier to aid the republic
in case Mexico attacked while negotiations progressed. The con-
dition was accepted, but later modified, so that we did not promise to
aid the republic until a treaty was accepted. At this juncture Upshur
was killed by the explosion of a cannon on the ship-of-war Princeton,
and when the negotiations actually began, Calhoun was secretary of
state. They ended in a treaty, signed April 12, 1844, in which Texas
was to become an American territory and surrender its public lands,
its indebtedness of $10,000,000 being assumed by the United States.
All this was done as quietly as possible, but secrecy could not be
maintained when the document came to the senate. Its publication
was not a surprise to the country, but it met none the less
a vigorous protest in the North. The South, it was said, T>n
•L j j .LI • i i • • rcejeciea.
had assumed the aggressive and was seeking to acquire an
immense region for the extension of the sphere of slavery. On the
other hand, the Southerners replied that they only wished to enlarge
the national domain and that the North selfishly sacrificed the glory
of the country in order to gratify an unreasonable feeling against the
South. As early as this the two sections had come to the inevitable
conflict between slavery and freedom. The problem now became
a very practical one for the politicians. The presidential campaign
was beginning, neither party was willing to assume the responsibility
of annexation, and so the treaty, which at first seemed safe, was de-
feated in the senate. Calhoun and Tyler had the matter much at
heart, and were sorely disappointed at the miscarriage of their plans.
While Texas thus engaged the attention of the South and North,
Oregon had become, an important matter to the people of the West,
440 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
For many years after the explorations of Lewis and Clark little was
done to occupy that region. But by 1840 many settlers following the
Missouri river had crossed the Rocky mountains to the
fer^ile valley of the Columbia, where England also had
claims to territory. The controversy to which these1
conflicting claims gave rise was an intricate one. The British claim
went back to 1778, when Captain Cook sailed along the
Pacific coast as far as about 54° north latitude; Spain
a^so nac^ claims m the same region, but relinquished them
Russia. in the Florida purchase treaty of 1819, by which she gave
up to the United States all right she may have had to the
coast north of 42° north latitude. Russia, also, had once held that
her Alaskan possessions extended south as far as Oregon, but in 1824
•Secretary Adams induced her to agree that her authority should
not extend south of 54° 40'. Thus in 1824 the region between 42°
and 54° 40' was free of Spanish and Russian claims, but there was still
the dispute with England. This we tried several times to arrange,
but always without success. In 1818 it was decided to leave the
country, now definitely known as " Oregon," to the joint use of both
powers for ten years ; and at the end of that period joint occupancy
was renewed indefinitely, either party to terminate it by
c^anc^of Siymg a year's notice. The Hudson Bay Company,
Oregon! ° with strong trading interests at Vancouver, was the center
of the British influence, and the Americans, missionaries
and traders with a few farmers, were settled chiefly on the Columbia.
In 1841 they numbered 400. In 1818 England and the United
States had agreed that the parallel 49° north should be the common
boundary as far as the Rockies, and the United States were now will-
ing to extend it directly to the Pacific, but to this proposition England
objected. She wished to have the Columbia for the southern boundary
of her Pacific coast possessions. On this basis nothing could be
determined, and so the matter was left to drift along until the settle-
ment of Oregon should make it necessary to come to a more definite
understanding.
The transference of American life to Texas, creating in Jackson's
administration a lively interest in southwestern expansion, could not
but awaken a similar feeling in regard to the Far North-
Political* west' About l838> therefore, Linn, senator from Missouri,
Issue^ 1844. a state whose position gave her great interest in North-
western expansion, opened a campaign for the erection
of forts along the Oregon trail as far as the mouth of the Columbia.
Of course, this would violate the existing agreement with England and
might lead to war. Another objection was that Oregon was so far
away that when settled it would become a colony, a thing for which
the constitution made no provision. Linn's efforts met strong op-
position in the East and for a while in the South. But in 1843 the
TWO PERPLEXED CANDIDATES 441
Texan question came up, and Southerners concluded that it could
be united with the Oregon question, since both related to expansion.
This gave the Northwest more hope. The feeling in that quarter
was now intense. Ignoring our former offer to accept the 4Qth
parallel, the West demanded all of Oregon, and the slogan, "Fifty-
Four Forty or Fight" was originated to express its position. It
was accepted by the democrats, who in the platform of 1844
demanded the " reoccupation " of Oregon and the "reannexation"
of Texas.
Meanwhile, the settlers in Oregon were rapidly increasing through
immigration, for agitation stimulated interest in the country. So
much did the people suffer from lack of a legal govern-
ment that in 1843 they formed an irregular government of Immi&ra
their own to continue until congress made further pro- Oregon?
visions for them. In May, 1844, a caravan of 1000 per-
sons, with 1967 oxen, horses, and cattle, started from the Kansas
river on the journey across the mountains. They were mostly from
Missouri. These events of necessity aroused the diplomats and led
to a renewal of negotiations. Great Britain opened the
question, but offered nothing better than the old terms,
which were promptly rejected. Then she suggested
arbitration, but this was also refused. At this point the
negotiation was suspended, probably to await the result of the elec-
tion, then near at hand.
THE ELECTION OF 1844
Early in 1844 Van Buren and Clay were generally considered the
inevitable candidates of their respective parties in the coming cam-
paign. The former had much reason to feel satisfied with
the outlook, for the congressional elections of 1842 gave ]j^ Texas
the democrats a majority of 70 in the house, and the dis- l844
couragement of the whigs through the quarrel with Tyler
had added greatly to their embarrassment. Across this promising
sky fell the cloud of antislavery. The year was hardly begun before
each candidate was forced to reply to questions as to his position on
the annexation of Texas. The democratic leader replied in a letter
which showed that he was at last in the same position that his ancient
enemy, Calhoun, was in when the nullifiers forced his hand in 1828.
He must oppose annexation and lose the support of the South, or
favor it and lose the support of his own section. He chose the former
course, hoping, no doubt, that he could so soften the blow as to retain
the good will of the South. He believed annexation constitutional,
he said, but inexpedient because it would involve a war with Mexico,
violate our neutrality obligations, and hold us up to the world as
willing to extend our power through a war of conquest ; but if Mexico
442 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
carried herself toward Texas so as to threaten our interest, the people
of the United States could be relied on to unite against her, and in
that case he would, if president, submit the matter to the wisdom of
congress.
Calhoun must have remembered the days of his own humiliation
when he saw this letter. He had spent the past thirteen years in
, arousing the South on slavery, and the result was now
FaUure.rCI * apparent. From every slaveholding state came protests
against the man who could temporize in such a situation.
Van Buren, said the Southern democrats, could not be trusted; he
was intimidated by the Northern antislavery men, and he must not
be nominated. From that time his selection, as even his best South-
ern friends admitted, was impossible. Andrew Jackson, old but
keenly watching the political field, could only exclaim: "I would to
God I had been at Mr. V. B.'s elbow when he closed his letter, I would
have brought to his view the proper conclusion. We are all in sack-
cloth and ashes !"
If Clay thought he would profit by his rival's predicament, he was
mistaken. He also had written a letter, known as his " Raleigh
Letter," from the place in which it was written; and in
*t ne to°k almost exactly the same ground that Van
Buren took. It did not defeat his nomination, for it
pleased the North, where his greatest strength lay ; but it caused dis-
may in the South, and so many requests that he soften his expressions
came from the whigs there that later in the summer he wrote other
letters saying that he had no personal objection to annexation "with-
out dishonor, without war, with the common consent of the union,
on just and fair terms." We shall see how this apparent juggling
of the question worked his ultimate undoing.
The two leading parties held their conventions in Baltimore in
May, 1844. The whigs made their choice harmoniously, naming
Clay without a dissenting voice, and Frelinghuysen, for
vice-President, on the fourth ballot. The democrats
Selected. were m sa(^ confusion. A majority of the convention was
instructed for Van Buren, but some of the pledged dele-
gates were opposed to him, and the two-thirds rule was used to prevent
his nomination. For a time it seemed that the party would be seriously
divided. Most of the Northern delegates stood by Van Buren, while
the Southerners were divided, some going for Cass, of Michigan, who
had strong Western support. As the ballots were taken, Van Buren
declined and Cass gained strength, until on the seventh he seemed in
a fair way to succeed. He was unpopular with the Old North, and
an adjournment was carried until next day in order to stop the trend
toward him. During the night much was done to find some man to
beat him. James K. Polk, of Tennessee, urged by his friends as a man
vouched for by Jackson, was now brought forward. On the first
FOLK'S HARD-WON VICTORY 443
ballot taken next morning he had 44 votes, and on the second Van
Buren was withdrawn and Polk nominated by a union of North and
South which swept away in the enthusiasm with which it was received
even the original Cass support. The nomination for vice-presidency
was offered to Wright, of New York, Van Buren's ablest lieutenant,
but he declined peremptorily, and it was then given to George M.
Dallas, of Pennsylvania. The platform declared for Texas and Oregon
and reaffirmed the party's opposition to a bank and to the distribution
of the funds derived from lands. Polk was not a brilliant man, but
he was a steady and industrious politician, and his party put away its
dissensions and entered the canvass hopefully.
Two other conventions were held. One nominated Tyler for presi-
dent with no other platform than his Texas record. The other
was held by the Liberty party, organized 1840, when it
cast 7100 votes for James G. Birney. He was now re-
nominated, with Morris, of Ohio, the candidate for vice-
president.
The campaign was full of bitterness and excitement. Clay traveled
widely, making speeches to immense audiences. The Texas men of
the South began to declare for annexation or a dissolution
of the union with such fervor that whigs and democrats ^ujfcs"
became alarmed, and hastened to say that no one ought to Disuni0n.
think of disunion. In Pennsylvania Polk was openly
accused of being a free trader. In a letter to Kane, of that state, he
said he was for a judicious tariff yielding enough revenue for the ex-
penses of government economically administered. It was a clever
statement, pleasing the South, which was alarmed at the
turn toward protection manifested in the tariff of 1842.
It also gave the democrats in protectionist Pennsylvania vania.
an opportunity to proclaim him a supporter of the tariff
of 1842, which was enacted to get money to defray the expenses of
government. They raised the cry, "Polk, Dallas, and the tariff of
1842 !" and thereby held the state in its old political faith. Still
more important was the attitude of the antislavery whigs, strong in
New York. Their first inclination was for Clay, but
his quibbling over annexation was so evident that several Yo®k veQ^e
thousand of them voted for Birney, thus reducing his vote
until it was below Polk's by 5104. If he had received New York's
36 electoral votes, he would have been elected. As it was, he got
105 votes, while Polk got 170. Polk lost North Carolina,
the state of his birth, and Tennessee, the state of his resi-
dence. He carried all the Gulf states, where annexation
was strongest, and all of the Northwest, where Oregon was an impor-
tant issue, while Clay carried all New England, where annexation
was opposed, and the Middle and the upper Southern states were
divided.
444 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
Folk's victory indicated that Texas would be annexed, and Tyler
used the last weeks of his administration in securing the prize. He was
now completely identified with the democrats, having
Authorised Provec^ ms friendship in the summer before the election
by withdrawing from the campaign lest the South be
divided. When congress met in December he again brought up the
Texan question, recommending immediate annexation by a joint
resolution. This method, requiring only a majority vote in each house,
was preferred to annexation by treaty, which required a two-thirds
majority in the senate. The Texas men took up Tyler's suggestion
with alacrity. The house passed it by a vote of 120 to 98, and the
senate by the close vote of 27 to 25. The democrats generally voted
in the affirmative, and a few of the Southern whigs, not willing to go
against the strong feeling of their section, took the same position.
The resolution, as passed, provided that Texas might become a state
when her constitution was accepted by congress, that four additional
states might with her own consent be formed out of her territory, that
boundary disputes should be settled by future negotiations between
the United States and any other foreign power who made objection,
that Texas should assume her own debt and surrender her land and
water defenses, that the principle of the Missouri compromise should
be extended to the Texan territory, and that the president should
have authority to complete annexation by negotiating with Mexico
or by an agreement with Texas, as he saw fit.
The last clause was to meet the objection of a few senators who
insisted that honor demanded that Mexico be conciliated. They
asserted that they had assurances that Polk would follow
tm's plan if the resolutions passed, but he later denied that
Polk. he gave such a promise. In fact, Tyler gave him no option
in the matter. Though only seven days of the term
remained to him, Tyler hurriedly dispatched a messenger to Texas
with an offer of annexation. It arrived none too soon, for Texas
was considering a proposition for a joint British and French guarantee
of Texan integrity, with further joint mediation with Mexico on the
question of boundaries. If Polk had resorted to negotiations, he
must have encountered this scheme, and Texas might have been lost.
As it was, Tyler's offer, and not England's, was accepted by the Texans,
and December 29, 1845, a new state was admitted to the
'State? * union. Mexico, watching the progress of annexation,
broke off diplomatic intercourse with the United States
as soon as congress passed the joint resolution, and a few months
later she declared that the admission of Texas into the union would
be equivalent to a declaration of war.
OREGON CONTROVERSY ADJUSTED 445
FOLK'S ADMINISTRATION
The war with Mexico is the chief event under Polk ; but before we
begin with it three other measures must be described. The first was
a new tariff bill, passed and approved by the president in
disregard of the campaign assurances of his friends in *j Tariff of
Pennsylvania. The tariff of 1842 was about as high as
that of 1832, and it pleased the protectionists. It did not suit the
democrats, who now controlled all branches of the government. They,
therefore, lost no time in passing a new bill, to which has been given
the name of Secretary of the Treasury Walker. It became law July
30, 1846, and provided for a reduction to a strictly revenue basis. It
was in force until 1857, when there was still further reduction. It
did not injure the manufacturing interests of the country, and sup-
plemented by other laws yielded sufficient revenue, even in the period
of war which followed its adoption.
The second measure was the settlement of the Oregon boundary.
Polk was especially anxious to make the Pacific coast American, and
showed firmness in executing the Oregon clause of his
party's platform. His first move was to offer to settle,
on the old basis, the extension of the parallel 49° to the
Pacific. The British minister in Washington refused the
offer bluntly without referring it to his government. Polk then asked
congress to do three things : (i) give notice to terminate the joint
occupation of the disputed region ; (2) erect forts there ; and (3) ex-
tend the laws of the United States over Oregon. Such a course
might undoubtedly lead to war, but Polk believed that England would
yield when she saw we were in earnest ; and the result showed he was
right.
But congress was divided. The whigs wished to avoid war, the
Northwestern members were firm for all the coast to the parallel 54°
40', and began to suspect that the South, having got Texas,
was willing to sacrifice Oregon, while some of the extreme . *
Southerners did not like the idea of enlarging the area ig^™61
which must eventually be free territory. Congress
wrangled until late in April, when it was finally decided to give notice
to end joint occupancy. England had watched the proceedings
closely. She did not wish war over so trivial a matter, and suggested
unofficially that we renew our former offer. Polk thought this beneath
the national dignity, and suggested that it was for England to reopen
the negotiation. She was clearly in the wrong, and yielded as grace-
fully as possible. June 6, 1846, she submitted a treaty accepting
the 49th parallel, and Polk, first getting the approval of the senate,
signed the treaty, which was later formally ratified. The Northwest
was deeply disappointed, but the rest of the country were satisfied
446 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
with the compromise. The Mexican conflict was now beginning,
and no one wished two wars at once.
The third matter related to California and New Mexico, a vast and
thinly populated possession of Mexico. The Oregon immigrants were
already entering California, and Polk believed that San
? ' cT ? ffef Francisco narDor was necessary to the development of
nia and New American power on the coast. Its acquisition, therefore,
Mexico. was a prime consideration in his policy from the time he
became president. In September, 1845, spite °f the
rupture of relations with Mexico, he sent Slidell to Mexico to purchase
the country, to settle the Texan boundary, and to adjust a mass of
claims of American citizens. Slidell was instructed to assume the
Mexican claims and pay $20,000,000 for that part of California from
and including San Francisco northward, while he might offer $5,000,-
ooo more for the part including Monterey. For New Mexico, part
of which Texas claimed, he might offer $5,000,000; and he was to
endeavor to get Mexico to accept the Rio Grande for her Texas
boundary. The affairs of Mexico were in great confusion, she was
badly in need of funds, and as she had intimated that she would be
willing to settle her relations with the United States, it was believed
that Slidell by skillful management could get what we wanted.
The result showed that Polk did not understand the Spanish-
American temperament. We were so unpopular with the Mexican
people on account of the annexation of Texas that our offer was not
even received, and Slidell was forced to return without the slightest
success. Then Polk realized that if we got California and New Mexico
we must resort to war, and for that contingency he was prepared.
Of the three matters of dispute the boundary question was the oc-
casion of the war. Under Spanish and Mexican control Texas
had never extended south of the Nueces, but the agree-
Boundary8 ment with Santa Anna, 1836, had recognized the Rio
Grande as the boundary (see page 421), a concession
Mexico promptly repudiated. But the Texans persisted in their
claim, and our government now took it up. The disputed region was
uninhabited, and it is probable that time and diplomacy would have
given it to us without a struggle. Such a course was not to be followed,
for Polk had other ends in mind.
Pending the results of SlidelPs diplomacy, General Zachary Taylor,
with 1500 men, took position at Corpus Christi just south of the mouth
of the Nueces, where he remained until early in 1846.
" When ^ was seen that Slide11 would accomplish nothing,
Taylor was ordered to the Rio Grande, and promptly
obeyed. General Ampudia, with a Mexican force, was
at Matamoras, on the south bank of the Rio Grande near its mouth.
He considered the last move of the American general an act of in-
vasion, and demanded that he fall back to the Nueces. He sent a force
TAYLOR'S OPERATIONS 447
across the river, which on April 24 surrounded a reconnoitering party
of Americans, killing and capturing them all. To Polk this was an
act of invasion, and he advised congress that war had been begun by
Mexico and that preparations for meeting it ought to be made. The
nation was deeply excited, and congress, accepting the statement of
the president, ordered the enlistment of 50,000 soldiers, and appro-
priated $10,000,000 for war expenses. In this way began the Mexican
war, May 12, 1846.
Three chief offensive movements were planned by the Americans.
One was intrusted to Taylor, who was to conquer the northern Mexi-
can provinces and distress the enemy until they were
willing to sue for peace. When in time this was seen to p£e
be insufficient, a second was organized to march from Vera the^ar!
Cruz against the 'Mexican capital. A third expedition,
launched in the beginning of the war, was to invade and take New
Mexico and then to proceed to the coast and occupy the weakly de-
fended province of California. The purpose was to occupy the disputed
region and hold it by force, to distress Mexico until she sued for peace,
and to secure California, which Slidell could not get, as war indemnity.
Taylor moved first. News of hostilities had aroused the whole
nation, and May 6, before congress had acted, reinforcements arrived
from New Orleans, with which he took the field against
the enemy, who had crossed the river. In two sharp Taylor's
engagements, Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma, he de- Battles,
feated them, forced them to recross the Rio Grande, and
then took Matamoras on May 18, Arista, the Mexican general, falling
back to Monterey. Taylor now paused until he could make more
deliberate plans. August 5 he resumed his advance, and September
20 invested Monterey, a strongly fortified town in which a large body
of Mexicans were posted. After three days the enemy were so crippled
that they asked for terms. They were allowed to march out with
their arms, and Taylor agreed not to continue his march for eight
weeks. The armistice displeased the president and was set aside, and
Taylor advanced and occupied Saltillo without opposition. December
29 he occupied Victoria, the capital city of the state of Tamaulipas.
He now had 10,000 men, and was holding a line 200 miles long. To
his surprise and disgust he received an order to send half his force to
Vera Cruz to join another army designed to march against the city
of Mexico. Like a good soldier he obeyed orders, and began to drill
the troops left him, chiefly raw recruits.
Almost immediately he learned that he was in great danger. Santa
Anna, the Mexican commander-in-chief, had concentrated 20,000
men and was marching northward to crush him. To fall
back to the Rio Grande meant a loss of all the prestige B*ena Vista,
of the campaign, and Taylor decided to fight. He took
position at the hacienda Buena Vista, five miles south of Saltillo,
448 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
where he was attacked by the Mexicans on February 23. His army
was posted between two mountains, and beat off the first attack with
a splendid rifle and artillery fire. Santa Anna then rallied his men,
turned Taylor's left, and made a bold dash at his line of retreat.
Troops less cool would have been thrown into confusion, but the
Americans trusted their commander and stood their ground. The
flanking party was driven back to the mountain, and only a ruse of
a pretended flag of truce saved them from capture. Santa Anna now
made his last effort. Massing his reserves, he fell on Taylor's center,
took its batteries, and penetrated the line for a considerable distance.
Then Taylor pushed forward a battery commanded by Bragg which
opened with grape and canister, while Jefferson Davis's Missis-
sippians and a small band of Indiana troops cut them to pieces on
the flank. Repulsed here, the enemy withdrew, leaving their dead
and wounded on the field. The battle of Buena Vista, taking com-
parative numbers into consideration, was the best fought engagement
of the war. After it was won Taylor remained undisturbed on the
Rio Grande.
The expedition of Scott was undertaken because an army could
not reach the enemy's capital from the Rio Grande. It was de-
cided to land at Vera Cruz, take well-fortified defenses, and fight
through the intervening region until the objective was reached.
Selecting a commander caused much trouble. Taylor was a whig, his
victories were fast making him a popular hero, and he was already
mentioned as a presidential candidate. Ought a democratic admin-
istration to continue to afford him an opportunity to achieve laurels ?
General Scott, head of the army, was also a whig and open to the same
objection. But the democrats had no good general of high rank,
although Senator Ben ton, who had great confidence in himself, was
willing to resign his seat and lead the second army of invasion. There
was much wrangling over the point, and valuable time was lost, but
at last good judgment prevailed, and Polk, putting political considera-
tions aside, intrusted the command to Scott, who on March 9, 1847,
began to land at Vera Cruz with more than 12,000 men. Before his
operations are described we must follow the fortunes of the third
movement, undertaken for the conquest of California.
Its conduct was intrusted to Colonel Stephen W. Kearny, who in
June set out with 1800 men from Fort Leaven worth, on the upper
Missouri, for Santa Fe. His greatest hardships were
Can ny'-S those of the march through an arid country, but on August
Expedition. l8 he entered Santa Fe, the Mexican army fleeing before
him. Following his instructions, he set up a temporary
government under the American flag, and a month later set out for
California, going by way of the Gila valley to the Colorado and thence
due west to San Diego. He started on this part of his campaign with
only 300 men, but meeting Kit Carson with news that California was
CALIFORNIA AND MEXICO
at the Beginning of the
MEXICAN WAR
Scale of Miles
110° Loncitude West from 100° Greenwich
SCOTT'S EXPEDITION 449
already conquered, he sent two-thirds of his detachment back to New
Mexico and proceeded with only 100 men.
The events to which Carson referred were strange, and filled with
the spirit of adventure. Early in 1846 Commodore Sloat, with a
squadron, was off the coast, with instructions to seize
the harbors if war began, and the American consul at ?he Prov"
Monterey was instructed to promote the spirit of inde- g^ed.
pendence among the inhabitants. At that time Captain
John C. Fremont, prominent as an explorer, was in California, engaged
in geographical research, and secretly longing for an opportunity to
raise the population, a portion of whom were Americans by birth,
against Mexico. The knowledge that war had begun put all these
forces into activity. Sloat took the ports of San Francisco and
Monterey, and Commodore Stockton, who relieved him, took Los
Angeles. Meanwhile, the inhabitants of the province rose against the
Mexican garrisons and raised the American flag, Fremont giving such
help as his small body of explorers afforded. Thus the whole prov-
ince fell into American hands, and when Kearny arrived in Decem-
ber, 1846, only the remnants of resistance were to be suppressed.
His authority superseded that of Stockton and Fremont, and he was
soon at odds with them over the form of government to be established.
The latter wished to have a territory with Fremont for governor.
But Kearny was ordered to proclaim a provisional civil government
with military support, and his compliance with the order was approved
by the president. i
When the news from California arrived in Washington Scott's
army was beginning to execute the third important phase of the land
operations. March 9 it landed three miles from Vera
Cruz and invested the place, while a fleet blockaded the
harbor. After five days of heavy bombardment, the town,
suffering from hunger and exhaustion, was surrendered.
Scott was an excellent general, as his proceedings now showed. Two
hundred and fifty miles away was the capital of Mexico, reached by
a good road which at eighty miles from the coast crossed a mountain
range, the pass of which was guarded by the hill of Cerro Gordo.
Here Scott, who advanced rapidly, found the enemy strongly posted
on April 17. In a battle which consumed most of -two days the army
carried the well-fortified hill, drove Santa Anna into disastrous
flight, and captured 3000 prisoners and a large quantity of arms and
supplies.
Now followed nearly four months of inaction, while futile efforts
for peace were made. Early in August the advance was resumed, and
on the nineteenth the army had passed around Lake
Chalco and faced the enemy at Contreras and Churu-
busco, two strong places a few miles south of the city.
In four days' fighting both positions were taken in the most gallant
2G
450 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
manner. The prize was now all but won, when an armistice was
granted and negotiations for peace were again begun. The demands
of the Mexicans were impossible, and Scott, convinced that they were
only made to gain time, broke off negotiations and took Molino del
Rey on September 8. He was now four miles from the city, but
before him stood the rock Chapultepec, 150 feet high, crowned with
batteries and flanked with outworks, all well manned. On the thir-
teenth he attacked this place, carrying it after the most desperate
resistance and coming at nightfall to the very gates of the city. These
he was ready to storm on the following morning when the city officials
appeared with a flag of truce and handed over the keys. By this
time the army of the defenders had withdrawn to Guadeloupe Hidalgo,
and his own troops marched through the gates to the great plaza,
where they raised their flag over "the Halls of the Montezumas."
With due allowance made for the inferior fighting ability of the Mexi-
cans, it was a splendidly won campaign ; and many an officer who
served gallantly on one side or the other in the civil war saw here
his first active service.
Polk began the war, thinking that Mexico would yield at the show
of force, and Trist, chief clerk of the state department, accompanied
Scott with the draft of a treaty of peace. This policy
was called "conquering a peace." It was Trist's pres-
HMalgo ence that caused Scott to halt twice in his march on the
capital, a course which only made the Mexicans think
the Americans timorous. This naturally angered Scott, who saw
it interfered with the vigor of his campaign. His protests at last
reached Washington, and just as the city of Mexico was entered
there arrived orders for Trist to desist and return home. A strong
feeling was arising in administration circles to demand all of Mexico.
Meanwhile, Trist remained in Mexico, spite of his recall, and February
2, 1848, he signed the treaty of Gaudaloupe Hidalgo, in accordance
with the instructions given him nearly a year earlier. It provided
that the boundary should follow the Rio Grande to the New Mexican
line, thence west to the first branch of the Gila, thence with the river
to the Colorado, and from that point with the boundary between
upper and lower California to the Pacific. The treaty was not
strictly binding, as Trist's authority had expired; but Polk sent it
to the senate, where it was accepted, March 10. It gave us New
Mexico and California, for which we agreed to pay $15,000,000 and
to assume the claims of American citizens against Mexico.
THE SLAVERY QUESTION IN A NEW FORM
Had the spirit of 1820 now prevailed it would have been possible
to divide the newly acquired territory between freedom and slavery.
Moderate men generally desired such an arrangement, but the most
SLAVERY AND THE NEW TERRITORY 451
earnest persons on each side of the controversy would not have it.
The North generally considered the war an act of Southern aggres-
sion and prepared a countermove. In 1846 a bill was be-
fore the house to appropriate money to enable the president phe ^ilmot
to make peace, when Wilmot, a Pennsylvania democrat,
offered his celebrated proviso that none of the territory acquired in
the war should be open to slavery. It passed the house, where the
North was in control, and was barely defeated in the senate. It
aroused a storm of protest in the South, which believed itself about
to be excluded from its fair share in the domain for which it had borne
the brunt of war. Spite of the efforts of party leaders, Southern
whigs dared not support the measure, and Northern democrats showed
a growing unwillingness to oppose it. Sectionalism was rampant,
and the union seemed imperiled. But the North did not yield. It
had definitely concluded that no more slave states should be admitted
to the union. If this plan were followed, the power of the South
would soon be broken, and slavery in the South itself would eventually
be hampered by irritating and disastrous limitations. The proviso was
again before congress in 1847, and again defeated through the opposi-
tion of the senate, where the South still maintained its hold.
While the country was awakening to this controversy, the election of
1848 drew near. The whigs nominated General Taylor, staking their
all on a military hero. He had no political experience, but
the good sense and kindliness which had led his soldiers to Election of
call him "Old Rough and Ready" recommended him to Tayk>i~
popular favor. He was a war hero neglected by the demo- Nominated,
cratic administration, and the people showed their dis-
position to right his wrongs. He was a Southerner and a slaveholder,
which gave him strength in the South, and it was believed his war rec-
ord would carry him through in the North. For vice-president
Millard Filmore, of New York, was named. The whig convention
tabled a resolution to adopt the Wilmot proviso.
The democratic party was handicapped by an internal conflict in the
important state of New York. One faction was called barnburners.
It favored reforms and got its name from a story of a Dutch
farmer who burned his barn to destroy the rats in it. Silas Barnburners
Wright was at the head of the group, but he had the sup- Hunkers,
port of Van Buren, William Cullen Bryant, editor of the
New York Evening Post, and many other liberal minded men. The
other group, called hunkers, were more practical men, and were sup-
ported by the Tammany society. Their leader was William L. Marcy,
and they got their name because they were supposed to hunger, or
"hunker," for office. The two factions hated one another so much
that Polk was bound to have trouble. In the beginning of his ad-
ministration he offered to take a barnburner into his cabinet, but the
men selected declined, and he made Marcy secretary of war. Then
452 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
followed trouble over the patronage, widening the breach until in 1848
nothing could bring the two factions to act together, and the result was
two sets of delegates to the national nominating convention, which as-
sembled at Baltimore, May 22, 1848.
Aside from the New York wrangle, the meeting was harmonious.
Recognizing the Wilmot proviso as a dangerous subject, the leaders
kept it in the background, and a resolution in its behalf was
mated.0 tabled by a large majority. Several persons were sug-
gested as candidates, but Lewis Cass, of Michigan, led
from the first ballot and secured the nomination on the fourth. He
had been in Jackson's cabinet, and was a man of ability and a popu-
lar leader in the West. With a candidate who pleased the West and a
platform which pleased the South success seemed assured. The hope
was defeated by the New York factions, each of which had been allowed
to cast half of the state's vote. Each refused this settlement, but the
hunkers pledged themselves to support Cass, while the other faction
protested against the tabling of the Wilmot proviso and repudiated Cass.
Returning from the convention, the barnburners called a state con-
vention at Utica and nominated Van Buren for the presidency on a
platform which demanded the adoption of the Wilmot pro-
Part S<°»r v*so* Then f°ll°wed a movement to consolidate all who
ganized.1" opposed the extension of slavery. In November, 1847,
the liberty party had nominated Hale of New Hampshire,
while a radical offshoot of that party, the liberty league, in June, 1848,
nominated Gerrit Smith. Moreover, many democrats and whigs were
disappointed because their respective conventions had avoided the
slavery issue. To unite all these elements a convention was called at
Buffalo, August 9, which founded the free soil party, two of whose
demands were that the territories be devoted to freedom and that the
public lands be distributed free to actual settlers. This done, Van
Buren was made the free soil candidate for president and Charles
Francis Adams, of Massachusetts, the candidate for vice-president.
Hale withdrew, and the liberty party and the barnburner organization
was merged into the free soil party. In the election which followed
the New York situation was the deciding factor. Taylor
Results.0*1 a carriecl the state with 218,000 votes against 120,000 for
Van Buren and 114,000 for Cass; and this meant a whig
victory. Had the barnburners supported Cass, he would probably
have carried the state. He had 127 electoral votes and Taylor had 1 63 .
Although both democrats and whigs avoided in their platforms the
question of slavery in the territories, the issue would not down. It
was now more urgent than ever, because a government
mad^°a must be established in Oregon and because gold having
Territory. been discovered in California the country was filling up
with an adventurous population. The issue was strongly
drawn in May, 1848, when Polk sent congress an urgent request for a
GROWING BITTERNESS 453
territorial government for Oregon. A bill was framed which ap-
proved the laws already adopted by the temporary government there.
Calhoun objected because, as he said, congress had no power to ex-
clude slavery from any territory. The antislavery men, on the other
hand, demanded specific restrictions. There was a long debate, the
upshot of which was a compromise bill applying the principles of the
Northwest Ordinance to Oregon and creating the territories of Cali-
fornia and New Mexico without power to pass on slavery, either for or
against it. The house tabled the bill, and finally, after much bitter-
ness, the provisions of the bill in relation to Oregon were passed as a
separate act. Thus Oregon became a territory without slavery, but
California and New Mexico must wait.
The next session of congress was a short one. The house passed a
bill to organize the territory of California without slavery, but the
senate refused to concur. Various other propositions on
the same subject were made, but none were acceptable. Futile Ses-
In this session, as in the former, Polk urged that the whole
question be settled by extending the Missouri compromise
to the Pacific, and some favored the idea. Probably the
South would have accepted it, but the North was aroused and was
determined to check the spread of slavery, so that Folk's suggestion
was not adopted. While this subject was being discussed, Northern
members brought in a bill to forbid the slave trade in the District of
Columbia. It passed the house, but was reconsidered and tabled. The
Southern members were aroused, and replied by asking for a committee
to prepare a more effective fugitive slave law. The request was not
granted, but it served to call the attention of the country to a concrete
grievance of the South. The Southern congressmen in an address
described the growth of discrimination, and soon afterwards the
southern legislatures passed resolutions of similar nature. North-
ern legislatures replied by demanding the exclusion of slavery from
the territories.
On March 4, 1849, congress adjourned after three months of bitter
debate, in which no progress was made toward removing the sectional
differences. Threats of disunion were freely uttered
by Southerners, and before adjournment they organized Disunion!
a committee which sent forth an address on the posi-
tion of the South. It reviewed the rise of opposition to slavery,
arraigned the aggressive spirit of the North on the question, declared
the South was denied a fair share of the territory it had done so much
to conquer in the recent war, and called on all Southern people to
stand as a unit in resistance of the treatment it received. The address
was warmly commended in the slave states by both whigs and demo-
crats. In the North there was also much excitement, and many legis-
latures there passed resolutions for the prohibition of the slave trade in
the District of Columbia.
454 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
THE COMPROMISE OF 1850
When the next congress met, December 3, 1849, affairs were no
nearer a settlement. California, tired of awaiting the action of con-
gress, had set up an irregular state government with the
ingfor" tacit aPProval °f President Taylor, and was asking for
Harmony. statehood, while New Mexico suffered many inconveniences
through the lack of a regular government. Something
must be done, but no one could say what. Behind all was the omi-
nous and growing movement for disunion. Cool-headed men, business
interests, and conservatives generally recognized the necessity of com-
promise ; and party managers, alarmed at the way negro slavery in-
terfered with older political alignments, wished to find some road to
harmony. The issue was fast destroying the whig party in the South,
and it threatened to undermine the democracy in the North.
Three suggestions of compromise came into the minds of the leaders.
One was the extension of the Missouri line to the Pacific. We have
seen that this was opposed by the antislavery North.
Sovereignty ^he second was to refer the question to the territories.
It was first made in 1847, when the Wilmot proviso was
being discussed ; and Cass in the same year adopted it in a letter to
a Tennessee supporter. It meant that congress should do nothing
about slavery in a territory, allowing slaveholders and non-slave-
holders to settle there as they chose, and that the people of the terri-
tory should decide the question for themselves when the territory
became a state. This doctrine, so consonant with the theory of state
rights, would probably have been accepted by the South in 1848.
Brought up later by Douglas, who named it " popular sovereignty,"
it played an important part in the conflict over Kansas and Nebraska.
The suggestion did not please the antislavery men, who meant that
slavery must be given no opportunity in the territories.
The third suggestion came from Clay. For nearly eight years he
had been in retirement, and was now sent back to the senate because
his friends thought he could do something to save the
Suggestion uni°n- At heart he favored the Wilmot proviso, and since
California and New Mexico evidently wished to save
themselves from slavery, he thought they ought to be gratified. Look-
ing over the field he prepared a plan of compromise which gave
something to each side. He thought all moderate men would unite
to pass it in order to remove the slavery question definitely from
the field of national politics. It appealed to his imagination that
"the Great Compromiser," as he was called, who had done good
services in the crises of 1820 and 1833 should finish his career with
another compromise, greater in its significance than either of the
other two.
CLAY AND CALHOUN 455
January 29, 1850, he introduced a series of resolutions providing
for: i. The admission of California as a free state; 2. The creation
of the territories of New Mexico and Utah without restric-
tion as to slavery ; 3. The assumption of the debt of Texas
contracted before annexation and the relinquishment of
her claim to a large part of eastern New Mexico ; 4. The prohibition
of the slave trade in the District of Columbia with the refusal to pro-
hibit slavery there without the consent of Maryland; 5. The more
effectual return of fugitive slaves to their masters ; and 6. The asser-
tion'that congress could not forbid the interstate slave trade.
A week later Clay made a two days' speech in defense of his reso-
lutions. The nation had come to the point of dividing, he said, and
it was time for each side to make concessions. The South
was defending its interests, the North was. contending c££?s^om~
for a sentiment ; and it was easier to relax sentiment than speech,
interest. The first and fourth resolution would favor the
North, and on these the South must be content to give way. The
others favored the South, and he pleaded that the North would be
reasonable and yield on these. His speech was filled with protesta-
tions of loyalty to the union of the fathers, a union which he and every
other old man present had seen born and develop through the preced-
ing sixty years. He spoke with wonderful effect to an audience which
filled every available foot of space in the senate chamber.
On March 4 Calhoun tottered into the capitol to speak to the reso-
lutions. He had come from a sick-bed, and could only sit and watch
the senators while his words were read by a friend. He
too was born before the constitution was written, but his Calhoun's
speech was no plea for concession. He had long been ^Peeech'~
rallying the South against the growing power of the North, south Out-
and this last appeal was a message of warning. The union, distanced,
he said, began with an equal distribution of power between
the North and the South, but at the end of sixty years the equilibrium
was destroyed. The census about to be taken would show a vast
preponderance of population in the North, and this was not due to
natural causes, but to three lines of policy followed by the federal
government. The first was the Northwest ordinance and the Mis-
souri compromise, by which the South was excluded from many of
the territories ; the second was the protective tariff ; and the third
was the growth of consolidation by which the power of the federal
government had come into the hands of the North. For a long time
there was a complete equilibrium in the senate, but of late the char-
acter of Delaware was become neutral, giving the North 28 and the
South 26 members of the senate. At present there were two Northern
territories, Minnesota and Oregon, and no Southern territories, in a
formative process. Add to this the proposition of the North for the
exclusion of the South from California, New Mexico, and Utah, and the
456 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
prospect was that there would be five more states added to the power
of the North. Could there be any doubt whither this situation would
lead?
About 1835, he continued, began the antislavery agitation, pro-
claiming as its purpose the destruction of slavery, an achievement
which would overturn the social system of the South.
ofhDis-OWth At first ignorec^ bv the two 8reat Parties, it had grown
union. untu< wmgs and democrats were afraid to oppose it, and its
latest demand was the exclusion of slavery from the terri-
tories. Would it ever be weaker than now ? Was it not evident that
if something were not done to check its progress the South must choose
between abolition and secession? The evidences that disunion is
growing are seen in the churches. The Methodists and Baptists are
already divided on the question of slavery, the bonds of the Presby-
terian church have begun to yield, and only the Episcopalians, of the
four great Protestant bodies, are not affected by the great dissension.
The same tendency is seen in the two great parties. Cord after cord
has broken, and if the agitation goes on, not a bond will remain to
bind together the two great sections of the country. This is
disunion.
Calhoun then came to his remedy for this aggravated situation.
He proposed an amendment to the constitution guaranteeing the
South an equal position in the territories, a fair execution
Remedy8 °^ ^e fugitive slave act, and a cessation of antislavery
agitation. Would the North accept this? She would if
she loved the union as she professed. It was not a gift in the posses-
sion of the South, the weaker section. "If you who represent the
stronger portion," he said to the Northern senators, "cannot agree
to settle them [the points mentioned] on the broad principles of justice
and duty, say so ; and let the states we both represent agree to sepa-
rate and part in peace. If you are unwilling we should part in peace,
tell us so, and we shall know what to do, when you reduce the question
to submission or resistance. If you remain silent you will compel us
to infer by your acts what you intend."
This speech was the last warning of the Southern Nestor, and four
weeks later he was dead. There are flaws in the argument, but he
stated clearly the situation of the South. It had played
Significance a losing game in the race for progress, it was now face to
hounds ^ace w*tn t^ie meyitable, and it must submit to the will
Speech. °f the North and allow slavery to be put in a way to be
extinguished, or it must separate from the North and es-
tablish a government of its own. Compromise was entirely without
Calhoun's ken. He realized that it was only a palliative and pleaded
calmly for Northern conciliation in a saddened eloquence which would
have been better expended if it had been used to reconcile his own
people to the inevitable progress of civilization.
WEBSTER'S LOVE OF UNION 457
March 7 Webster rose to speak. He too had seen the union pass from
its birth through a period of doubt to a splendid maturity. He grew
up to manhood when patriotism was a passion, the best
efforts of his life had been given to establish the ideals of Webster's
union, and he was dismayed at the prospect which Calhoun Marc°h 7.
held up so firmly. Moreover, Webster, like many other
cooler Northerners, had no enthusiasm for abolition. He did not
believe slavery as undesirable as disunion, and he now threw his whole
soul into the task of calming the Northern mind, charging the aboli-
tionists with excessive severity, and pleading that the South be not
driven into the last ditch. Conservative Northerners approved the
speech, but the verdict of the antislavery men was far otherwise.
One compared him with Benedict Arnold, another exclaimed :
"Webster is a fallen star! Lucifer descending from heaven!" and
he was freely charged with bidding for the Southern whig support for
the presidency. He undoubtedly had his ambitions, but he would
hardly have risked his standing at home if he had not felt that duty
impelled him. The avalanche of criticism under which he was buried
shows how much the North was aroused against slavery.
Clay's resolutions were debated, with some intermissions, for three
months before bills embodying their principles were introduced. One
was called "the Omnibus Bill," because it contained his
recommendations in regard to California, New Mexico,
Utah, and Texas; another prohibited the slave trade Adopted,
in the District of Columbia, and still another provided a
better fugitive slave law. As the debate proceeded, the "Omnibus
Bill" was broken up into three measures, each of which, with the two
other propositions, was adopted through the efforts of Clay. Thus
the North gained the admission of California as a free state and the
prohibition of the slave trade in the national capital. The South had
a distinct gain in the new fugitive slave law, which gave to the federal
courts the execution of the law, and Texas was relieved of her debt
incurred in the struggle to win and maintain her independence. In the
creation of New Mexico and Utah as territories the North lost to the
extent that the Wilmot proviso was not applied, but the net gain was
bound to be hers as one of the territories was north of the Missouri
line and the other could not hope soon to be a state.
June 3, while the compromise was being debated, a Southern con-
vention met in Nashville, nine states being represented. The dele-
gates from South Carolina and Mississippi were for extreme
measures, but cooler heads restrained them, and the con-
vention contented itself with demanding the extension vention. "
of the line 36° 30' to the Pacific. For all Calhoun's de-
liberate gloom the Southern people were not yet ready to secede. But
the convention had an important influence on the action of congress.
The extreme Northerners declared it a mere threat, and believed that
458 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
the talk of secession was gasconade. In the light of later events we
know that disunion had taken a strong hold in the South, although it
had not yet been accepted by the great mass of people there.
July 9 President Taylor died. Although not experienced in politics,
he had made a good executive. He had a soldier's love of duty and
a leaning toward the enforcement of authority which
President, reminds one of Jackson. Talk of secession aroused his
opposition, and he was not favorable to compromise. Fill-
more, his successor, was conservative by nature and gave active sup-
port to Clay's plans. The great compromise having passed, he
sought to enforce it, and wished it to be, as it was intended, a final
settlement of sectional dissensions. His administration was void
of other important events.
July 5, 1850, was ratified the Clayton-Bulwer treaty, referring to
the construction of an Isthmian canal. Hopes of such a waterway
had long been entertained in Central America, but the
interest of the United States in it sprang chiefly from their
acquisition of their Pacific coast. In 1846 a treaty was
made with New Granada, looking to a canal at the Isthmus of Panama.
Soon afterwards a railway was begun at this point, but no canal con-
struction was attempted. At the same time Great Britain was moving
to get possession of the Nicaraguan route. She had acquired the east-
ern, and was making efforts to get the western, terminus. Nicaragua
feared that these steps would lead to the most serious results, and
sought to play the United States against England. Our general
opposition to an increase of British influence in Central America was
sufficient to arouse interest. American capital was also negotiating
for a canal charter, and in 1849 a treaty was negotiated with Nica-
ragua, but not ratified, by which we got a concession for a canal and
agreed to guarantee the integrity of Nicaragua. Then followed com-
plications with Great Britain, the result of which, 1850, was the treaty
which bears the names of the American secretary of state and the
British minister in Washington, Clayton and Bulwer. It pledged each
nation to maintain the neutrality of any interoceanic canal which either
should construct at any point in Central America, agreed to admit
other nations to the benefits of the treaty, and promised that neither
power should extend its possessions in that region.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The best general works are : McMaster, History of the People of the United
States, vols. VI and VII (1906, 1910), the fullest and most reliable general treatment ;
Schouler, History of the United States, vols. IV, V (1891) ; Von Hoist, Constitutional
and Political History, 8 vols. (Eng. trans., ed. 1899) ; Wilson, History of the Ameri-
can People (1905) ; Garrison, Westward Extension, 1841-1850 (1906), very satis-
factory; and Stanwood, History of the Presidency (1898).
The leading biographies are : Schurz, Henry Clay, 2 vols. (1887) ; Shepard, Van
Buren (1888) ; McLaughlin, Cass (1891) ; Morse, John Quincy Adams (1882) ;
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 459
Lodge, Webster (1883); Curtis, Daniel Webster, 2 vols. (1870); Meigs, Life oj
Benton (1904) ; Curtis, James Buchanan, 2 vols. (1883) ; Hunt, Life of Calhoun
(1907) ; Hart, Salmon P. Chase (1899) > Bancroft, Life of Seward, 2 vols. (1900) ; and
Dodd, Statesmen of the Old South (1911).
For the sources see: The Congressional Globe, 108 vols. (1834-1873); Benton,
Abridgment of the Debates, 16 vols. (1857-1861), extends to 1850; House Executive
Documents, Senate Executive Documents, House Reports, and Senate Reports, a Table
and Annotated Index was published in 1902 ; Richardson, Messages and Papers of (he,
Presidents, 10 vols. (1896-1899) ; MacDonald, Select Documents, 1776-1861 (1898) ;
Hasvvell, Treaties and Conventions (1889) ; and Peters, Statutes at Large, 8 vols.
(1845-1846), continued in United States Statutes at Large.
Of the contemporary periodicals the most valuable are : Niles' National Regis-
ter (1811-1849), whig in sympathy, but contains many documents; The National
Intelligencer (Washington, 1800-1870), whig organ; The Globe (Washington, 1830-
1845), democratic organ; The Enquirer (Richmond, 1804-1877), voiced the old
Virginia influence, ably edited by Ritchie ; The Evening Post (New York, con-
tinuous from 1801), supported the barnburners, edited by Wm. Cullen Bryant
from 1828 to 1878; The New York Tribune (1841-), antislavery, very in-
fluential; The Liberator (Boston, 1831-1865), extreme antislavery; and The Na-
tional Era (Washington, 1847-1864), antislavery, but moderate.
Many contemporaries left memoirs or narratives. Among them are : John
Quincy Adams, Memoirs, 12 vols. (1874-1877), very valuable; Benton, Thirty
Years' View, 2 vols. (1854-1857), to be used with caution : Tyler, Letters and Times
of the Tylers, 3 vols. (1884-1896); Folk's Diary, 4 vols. (1910); Webster, Works,
6 vols. (1851), in 7 vols. (1897) ; Calhoun, Works, 6 vols. (1853-1859) ; Ibid., Corre-
spondence (ed. by Jameson, Am. Hist. Assn. Reports, II, 1899) ; Garrison and
Garrison, William Lloyd Garrison, 4 vols. (1885-1889); Wise, Seven Decades of
the Union (1881) ; and Buchanan, Works of, 12 vols. (Moore, ed., 1908-1911).
Financial matters are treated in Dewey, Financial History (1903) ; Bolles,
Financial History, 3 vols. (ed. 1897) ; Taussig, Tariff History (ed. 1898) ; Stanwood,
Tariff Controversies, 2 vols. (1903) ; Kinley, The Independent Treasury of the United
States (1893) ; Dunbar, Laws Relating to Currency, Finance, and Banking (ed.
1897) ; Scott, Repudiation of State Debts (1893) > and Sumner, History of Banking
in the United States (in History of Banking in All Nations, 4 vols. 1896).
The antislavery literature is very abundant, but the following books are suffi-
cient for most students : Hart, Slavery and Abolition (1906) ; the best recent book,
impartial and supplied with a good bibliography ; Garrison and Garrison, William
Lloyd Garrison, 4 vols. (1885-1889) ; Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sum-
ner, 4 vols. (1877-1893) ; Birney, James G. Birney and His Times (1890) ; and
Smith, The Liberty and Free Soil Parties in the Northwest (Harvard Studies, 1897).
Texas annexation is well treated in Justin H. Smith, Annexation of Texas (1911) ;
Garrison, Westward Extension (1906) ; Ibid., History of Texas (1903) ; Ibid., "The
First Stage of the movement for the annexation of Texas," in Am. Hist. Rev., X,
72 ; Reeves, Diplomacy under Tyler and Polk (1907) ; Adams, British Interests and
Activities in Texas (1910), should be used in connection with Smith's review, American
Historical Review, XVI, 151 ; and Texas Diplomatic Correspondence, 3 parts (Am.
Hist. Assn. Reports, 1908).
On the northeastern and northwestern boundary disputes see : Moore, Digest
of International Arbitrations, 6 vols. (1895) ; Ganong, Boundaries of New Bruns-
wick (Royal Soc. of Canada Transactions, 1901-1902) ; Mills, British Diplomacy
in Canada (Royal Colonial Institute's Journal, United Empire, 1911); Gallatin,
Right of the United States to the Northeast Boundary (1840) ; Greenhow, History of
Oregon and California (1844) ; Twiss, The Oregon Question (1846) ; and Bourne,
Legend of Marcus Whitman (Essays in Historical Criticism, 1900, also in Am. Hist.
Rev., VI).
On the war with Mexico see : Ripley, The War with Mexico, 2 vols. (1849) 5
Wright, General Scott (1894) ; Howard, General Taylor (1892) ; Scott, Memoirs,
460 PERIOD OF THE SLAVERY CONTROVERSY
2 vols. (1864), to be used with discrimination; Livermore, War with Mexico Re-
viewed (1850), on the political side; Bancroft, History of Mexico, 6 vols. (1883-
1888) ; Ibid., History of California, 7 vols. (1886-1890) ; and Hittell, History of
California, 4 vols. (1886-1897).
On the compromise of 1850 see : Rhodes, History of the United States, 7 vols.
(1892-1906) ; Greeley, The American Conflict, 2 vols. (1868-1870) ; Schurz, Henry
Clay (1887) ; Stephens, War between the States, 2 vols. (1868-1870) ; and Davis,
Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, 2 vols. (1881).
On the Isthmian canal see : Keasbey, The Nicaragua Canal and the Monroe
Doctrine (1896) ; Huberich, The Trans-Isthmian Canal (1904) ; and Travis, History
of the Clayton-Bulwer Treaty (Michigan Pol. Sc. Assn. Publications, 1900).
For Independent Reading
Davis, Recollections of Mississippi and Mississippians (1891) ; Higginson,
Cheerful Yesterdays (1898) ; Wise, Seven Decades o/ the Union (1881) ; Parkman,
The Oregon Trail (1892 and other editions); Irving, Astoria (many editions);
Royce, History of California (1886) ; and Clarke, Antislavery Days (1884).
CHAPTER XXII
SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, 1815-1861
GROWTH OF POPULATION AND THE RESULTS
DURING the years 1815-1860 the westward movement of population
continued the most noticeable feature of our domestic affairs. In the
former year the Atlantic states had about 5,800,000 in-
habitants, in 1860 they had 15,895,971, while the region A 61*.
lying westward had increased from 1,500,000 in 1815 to
15,484,350 in 1860. Had the old feeling of opposition
between the East and the West persisted, the latter section would in
1860 have been nearly in the supremacy. That it did not persist was
due to two causes, i. The democratic party, founded as an expres-
sion of the will of the rural classes, had a strong hold in all parts of the
country. It was a truly national bond. 2. The rise of the slavery
question introduced a new kind of sectionalism, the North against the
South. By this newer alignment the North was very powerful. In-
cluding the free West, it had in 1860 a population of 20,309,960, while
the South had 11,133,361.
In a new country the birth rate is high, and to this must be attrib-
uted the greater part of the rapid growth in numbers. But another
important fact was immigration, which increased swiftly
after the war of 1812. The growth of manufactures and
the development of the West created a great demand for
labor, while disturbances and suffering in Europe gave an impetus for
emigration to a land where wages were high and homes awaited those
who would have them. The records of immigration, kept from 1820,
show that from that year to 1860, inclusive, 5,055,938 aliens, including
travelers, arrived in the United States, most of them coming from three
countries. Ireland, afflicted with famine and many other ills, led with
1,880,943, Germany came next with 1,545,508, and England was
third with 744,285. France, Switzerland, and the Netherlands sent
considerable numbers; but the nations from which we have lately
received most of our immigrants then sent few. For the entire period,
only 16,776 came from Italy, Russia, and Poland.
The immigrant avoided the states in which slavery was the preva-
lent form of labor. He could not compete with it in wages, and it
made it difficult for him to become a proprietor of his own enter-
prises. In 1860 the foreign-born population was 4,136,175, and
461
462 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
of this the fifteen slave states had 471,000, more than half of whom
were in the border states of Missouri and Maryland.
It: was said at the time that white labor could not thrive in
South. the South. The experience of the last half century shows
that the opinion was erroneous. It seems evident that but
for the presence of slavery the South would have the share of im-
migration to which its fertile soil and agreeable climate entitled it.
The immigrant was rarely a pioneer. The hard task of exploring
the wilderness and pushing the Indian westward was assumed by the
natives, while the less adventurous European was content
to arr^ve wnen towns were being planted and farming lands
were Demg taken up. Thus, in the seven territories in
existence in 1860, with a total population of 220,197,
there were only 35,476 foreign-born persons, while in the five states of
the old Northwest, with a total population of 6,926,884, there were
1,197,736 foreign-born persons. The rapid growth of manufactures
in the East absorbed a large portion of the newcomers. In the six
great manufacturing states, New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts,
New Jersey, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, with a total population
in 1860 of 9,324,818, there were 1,930,139 persons of foreign birth.
Thus we see that in eleven states, constituting the older agricultural
West and the manufacturing East, were concentrated 75.6 per cent of
the immigrant population.
Most immigrants were good laborers, and a few were able to pur-
chase farms. Some were diseased, and it was known that parishes
in Europe had sent their paupers. By 1830 public opinion,
Opposition which was all for immigration in 1815, began to change,
grants^Vot- and demands were heard for discrimination among the in-
ing. coming multitude. The Irish caused special alarm. They
were hot-tempered and clannish, clung to the cities, and
soon fell into the hands of designing politicians. As they were gener-
ally Catholics, a solid Irish vote caused alarm to those who feared the
American doctrine of strict separation of church and state might be
weakened. As a result, much was said about denying to the immi-
grants the right both to vote and hold office, but neither of the great
political parties was willing to espouse such a principle.
Finally the advocates for reform effected a distinct organization,
calling themselves Native Americans. They appeared chiefly in the
cities, and nominated candidates for city office. In Boston
Americans6 in l83? a riot grew out of the excited feeling of the "Na-
tives" and the Irish. In the same year the Native Amer-
ican Association was created, demanding of congress the repeal of
the naturalization laws. Throughout the succeeding years there was
much ferment. City after city fell into the hands of the Native Ameri-
cans ; and in the summer of 1844 there was prolonged rioting in Phil-
adelphia, occasioned by a protest of the Catholics against the use of the
NEW STATES 463
Protestant Bible in the public schools. The matter became a cam-
paign issue, the democrats espousing the cause of the naturalized
citizens, and denouncing the spirit of persecution. The victory of
Polk did not discourage the Native Americans, and in 1847 they held
a national convention and indorsed Taylor for president. Violence,
which had never been approved by the leaders, was now abandoned,
and the organization seemed losing its influence. But the impulse
-persisted, and in 1850 was founded the Order of the Star Spangled
Banner, which proved the germ of the Know Nothing movement
(see page 493). Voting by newly arrived immigrants, which was the
chief complaint of nativism, has been allowed to this day most liberally
by the states, who have jurisdiction of the suffrage.
Vast changes in the national domain occurred between 1815 and
1860. A schoolboy in the former year would learn that Florida was
Spanish and that our southwestern border was Texas and
New Mexico. Our claim to Oregon was so indefinite that
it hardly counted at that time in the popular mind. By
1860 our western boundary was the Pacific, and 444,053
Americans were settled on the coast. Here already were two states —
California, admitted in 1850, and Oregon, a state in 1859 — and one
territory, Washington, set off in 1853. In 1815 no state but Louisi-
ana existed beyond the Mississippi. We have seen how Missouri
was admitted in 1820, balancing the free state of Maine. The process
continued steadily as the settlement of the territories proceeded.
In 1836 Michigan and Arkansas were admitted, in 1845 Texas and
Florida came in, followed by the two free states of Iowa in 1846 and
Wisconsin in 1848, and in 1858 Minnesota was admitted. Thus by
1860 a belt of states extended the whole length of the Mississippi on
the west. Beyond it to the confines of Washington, Oregon, and Cali-
fornia was a great area embracing the territories of Kansas, Nebraska,
Utah, and New Mexico, destined within a short time to be divided into
several territories. The only part of the national domain not or-
ganized into territories in 1860 was the portion of the two Dakotas
lying between Minnesota and the Missouri, a region in which the
powerful Sioux tribes had their homes.
THE INFLUENCE or GREAT INVENTIONS
In 1815 the United States had already begun to use power machinery
in industry. The first effects were seen in New England,
every stream of which had water power. Manufactures Manu-
now took the place of commerce as the chief form of in- ^ut"es
dustry, and the seat of wealth was no longer confined to the Growth of
seaports. The immigrants furnished an operative class Towns,
and the towns grew rapidly ; while the farmers, drawn more
and more away to the West, left agriculture in a languishing state.
464 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
In the Middle states towns grew as readily as in New England, but
the greater fertility of the soil sustained the prosperity of agriculture,
spite of the drain of men to the Western lands.
For all this rich life transportation was an essential. It was needed
to carry merchandise to the interior, to bring farm products to the
seaboard, and to bind the remote regions to the seacoast.
amTcanals Steamboats, canals, and railroads all served this purpose.
The first were especially useful on the rivers of the in-
terior. In these initial days of Western development, when every
promoter could call up a vision of wealth, the papers were full of
schemes to establish navigation companies. Many of the plans
proved failures, others had short careers and gave place at last to rail-
roads, and some were established successfully.
In 1828 canals were much in vogue in the West and in the seaboard
states. New York was reaping great advantages from the Erie canal,
Railroads ^en tnree vears completed. Pennsylvania had just
inaugurated a system of roads and canals which would
deliver a vast amount of the Western traffic to Philadelphia, and the
Potomac people were planning to construct a canal parallel to the river,
whence by easy roads they could reach the tributaries of the Ohio.
If these routes were opened, Baltimore's thriving trade would be turned
aside and her glory would be gone. In desperation she thought of
a railroad, and July 4, 1828, the first stroke was made on the Balti-
more and Ohio line. The success of the undertaking led to many
other similar enterprises, North, South, and West. Sometimes the
state built the railroad and operated it, but more frequently it was
built by a chartered company and received aid from the state either
in bonds given in exchange for stock, or in land donated. By 1840
the railroad had demonstrated its superiority over the canal and was
in general use. Most of the roads were short, built to connect impor-
tant towns or cities, and the era of consolidation did not appear until
just before the civil war (see page 733). It was not until 1853 that
Chicago had an all-rail line of travel to the seacoast. The develop-
ment of railroads gave great importance to the great business corpora-
tion, whose shares became a medium of investment and speculation.
Now arose also the necessity of making laws defining the relation of
railroads to the public. They could no longer be looked upon as mere
private enterprises, since they were vitally connected with the welfare
of the communities through which they ran. Out of this relation
arose, chiefly after the civil war, a great conflict between capital and
the public.
While railroads largely superseded steamboats on the small streams,
they did not soon replace them on the great rivers. On the Missis-
sippi the boats were especially numerous and luxurious. They vied
with one another in speed and comfort, and the trip from St. Louis to
New Orleans was long remembered by the traveler who took it on
LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY
465
graph, the
Reaper, and
the Sewing
one of these fine craft. For many years it was said that a steam-
boat could never cross the Atlantic because she could not carry the
necessary fuel; but the Savannah disproved this in 1819,
going with auxiliary steam power, and the Sirius and Great Ste»™boats
Western, going entirely by steam, in 1838. In 1840 the
Cunard line began to operate steam packets regularly
between New York and Liverpool. Other steamships were soon
crossing the ocean, but for many years the fast and graceful clip-
pers of the day continued to be the favorite means of passing over
the Atlantic.
Many other inventions of this period contributed to the progress of
the country. In -1844 Morse invented the electric telegraph, which
he did by combining in a practical way several discoveries
of scientists who preceded him. As a means of bringing The Tele-
one part of the country into close business and social rela-
tions with another part, it was hardly less important than
the railroad. In 1834 McCormick invented the reaper, MachineT
building, also, on many principles discovered by men who
preceded him. It was vastly improved in 1845-1847, and found a
ready place in the agricultural life of the country. It revolutionized
industry in the West, where the fertile lands were well adapted to
wheat-raising. With the reaper to harvest the grain and the railroads
to take it to the seaports, the West became in a short time a granary
for many parts of Europe. In 1846 Elias Howe patented his sewing
machine, after many years of struggle against poverty and illness.
It was destined to revolutionize the clothing-making industry and to
lighten the labor of housewives in all parts of the world. These impor-
tant inventions, with many others of less importance, testified to the
versatility and strength of the inventive faculty in the United States,
and gave the American people a prominent place among the progres-
sive industrial nations. They were accompanied by a quick-witted
adaptation of the great inventions of other countries, which powerfully
stimulated the development of business and general comfort.
THE INDIANS
In 1815 Indian tribes lived east of the Mississippi in the extreme
Northwest, in Tennessee and the region south of it, and in Florida,
which was still in the hands of Spain. The advance of •
the whites gradually pushed them back in the lake region,
and they gave up their lands in a series of treaties which
by 1830 left them only the prairies south of Lake Michigan and the
lands between that lake and the Mississippi. In the southern parts
lived the Sacs and Foxes, who in 1804 ceded their lands between the
Illinois and the Wisconsin, retaining permission to occupy and hunt
on them until they were sold to the whites. During the war of 1812
2H
466 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
some of the Sacs crossed the Mississippi, but the remainder con-
tinned in the valley of the Rock river. By 1830 the
War ^ surrounding country was filling with settlers who looked
longingly at the fine Indian lands. Then followed a deed
which, from its frequent recurrence in similar situations, may be pro-
nounced the normal way of beginning an Indian war. Late in the
year, while the men were hunting, white intruders broke up their
village, drove the women and children to the forest, and established
themselves in the fertile corn land at the mouth of Rock river, the site
of the present town of Rock Island. When the hunters returned they
took up arms under the leadership of Black Hawk and retook their
village. Troops were called out, but hostilities seemed avoided when
Black Hawk moved his people across the Mississippi after promising
never to return. In the following year, however, he was back in the
tribal lands, committing depredations against the whites. He was
now pursued by a force of regulars and militia, driven into Wisconsin,
and captured after a severe battle at Bad Axe. The Black Hawk war
was the last Indian struggle on the northwestern frontier until the gold
hunters began to invade the Rocky Mountain region more than thirty
years later.
This affair in Illinois must have been a striking object lesson to the
Georgia Indians, who, as we have seen (page 400), were in the same
year, 1832, at the height of their contention with the state
TheSitua- authorities. In 1830, congress, following the suggestion
Georgia * °^ t^ie President, offered to give lands beyond the Missis-
Indians, sippi to such eastern Indians as would remove thither.
But the Indians refused to move, and appealed to the
supreme court, relying on their treaty rights. The verdict was in their
favor, but through President Jackson's failure to execute it they
profited nothing by it ; and Georgia proceeded to establish her civil
authority in the region over which the Indian law had extended. • She
also began to sell their hunting lands and threatened to take their
farms and homes. What she did for the Cherokees and Creeks within
her borders, Mississippi was ready to do for the Chickasaws and Choc-
taws within her limits.
Under such conditions, the Indians could do nothing but yield.
The Creeks sold their lands to the federal government in 1832, the
Chickasaws and Choctaws in 1833, and the Cherokees in
Acrom*1 l8?5' A few members of the last-named tribe refused to
pushed. abide by the sale and were removed by force. For all the
land these Indians sold the federal government promised
liberal annuities, or agreed to sell the relinquished lands and
hold the proceeds in trust for the Indians. It also paid the cost
of removal and donated new lands in the West. In 1834 con-
gress established Indian territory in the fertile valley of the Ar-
kansas. More accurately speaking, it was a series of reservations,
THE FLORIDA INDIANS 467
on each of which a nation was placed with the assurance that
it would never be moved and that no white man should settle
within its border without a license. Each nation was to have its
own council and make and execute its own laws ; and assistance was
given to enable the Indians to contend with the worst
difficulties of life in a new environment. There was no
regular territorial government, and no hope of statehood
was held out. A large part of the Indian territory was left unassigned
in order that the Northwestern tribes might be induced to settle on
it. As this expectation was not realized, these unsettled lands were
many years later opened to settlement by the whites and became
organized as Oklahoma territory.
In one other quarter occurred trouble with the Indians. In Florida
lived the Seminoles. Many fugitive slaves had settled among and
intermarried with them, and it was considered desirable to
remove this tribe, also, to the West. In 1833 they were nol® ^^~
induced to make a treaty for that purpose, and the next year
an agent was sent to execute it. This aroused the resident fugitive
slaves, who foresaw that they would be returned to bondage. They
joined with the less submissive Indians and made up a party who defied
the government under the lead of Osceola, an able half-breed whose
father was a white man named Powell. His wife was the daughter of
a negressx an escaped slave, and in 1835 sne was seized when on a
friendly visit to Fort King. Osceola protested and was arrested.
Feigning submission, he was released, only to make secret plans for
resistance. In November, 1835, he put himself at the head Osceola
of the discontented ones, drove the friendly chiefs into the
forts of the white men, retired into the swamps, and made himself a
source of terror to the settlements. Troops were now hurried to
Florida, but Osceola, fighting with great energy and bravery, drove
them back to the forts and held at his mercy all the open country
south of St. Augustine. Reinforcements were called for, but these
had little better success. The years 1836 and 1837 witnessed many
encounters in which the Indians, having fought as long as they dared,
fled at last to the swamps, into which they could not be followed. In
1837 the Seminoles agreed to go West if allowed to take with them
" their negroes, their bonafide property." Many of them assembled
at Tampa, and transports were ready to take them to New Orleans,
when white men appeared to claim the fugitive slaves. Resistance
was immediately renewed, and the struggle went on again more bit-
terly than ever. Later in the year Osceola was seized at a conference
under a flag of truce and sent to Fort Moultrie, at Charleston, where
he died in January, 1838. In the following December Colonel Zachary
Taylor defeated the Indians in an important battle in Okechobee
Swamp, but he was not able to follow the survivors into the recesses
of the swamp, and so the war dragged on until the last remnant of re-
468 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
sistance yielded and the Seminoles finally consented to remove in 1842,
Even then a few remained in the everglades of southern Florida,
where their descendants are still found. Since the surrender of the
fugitive slaves was the chief question at stake, this long and expensive
struggle aroused strong criticism from the antislavery men of the
North, who denounced the affair as a slaveholders' war.
By this time nearly 125,000 Indians had been induced to cross the
Mississippi, either to Indian territory or to the unorganized region
of the Northwest. Many small bands remained near
" their old homes, mere fragments of the older tribes and
tem shorn of all power to resist the advance of the white man's
civilization. For the western tribes the reservation sys-
tem was now well developed. It meant that the government would
keep the Indians quiet by distributing rations and blankets, establish-
ing agencies for distribution, regulating the traders who came to
monopolize the profitable Indian trade, and restricting as much as
possible the sale of spirits to the savages. For these purposes the
government spent liberally, and as the reservations were remotely
located the system offered rare opportunity for fraud through the col-
lusion of traders, agents, and the contractors who furnished supplies.
The system, moreover, lessened the Indian's sense of self-dependence,
and offered him little inducement to acquire habits of thrift and in-
dustry. It tended to pauperize his spirit and to give him a contempt
for the white man's ideals. At this time the lavish expenditure of
money on Indian education had not begun.
SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOUTH
The lands of the South are of three kinds : i. Mountainous, extend-
ing as far southward as northern Georgia, fertile in itself but heavily
timbered and inaccessible. The small valleys between
M ^ntain ^e ridges, popularly know as " coves," fell into the hands
Region. °^ P°°r men wno drifted in from the lowland, and the
society that resulted was provincial and unenterprising, but
essentially bold and self-sufficient. Here and there was a small town,
but the country was generally covered with forest broken at intervals
by small clearings. Very few of the inhabitants were slaveholders,
and in 1860 they were mostly for the union.
2. The Piedmont region, adjacent to the mountains and not adapted
to cotton cultivation. The inhabitants were generally small farmers
and owned few slaves, many of them none at all. The
Piedmont lands along the infrequent rivers were fertile, and supported
Region!*1 large plantations stocked by slaves. But most of the
people were poor. Some tobacco was raised, but the iso-
lation of the region made it difficult to market the crop. This was a
food-producing section, and most of the large planters in it were rich be-
"POOR WHITES"
469
cause their slaves were fruitful. From 1825 to 1860 there was a steady
emigration of the small farmers to the new states of the Northwest.
3. The Atlantic and Gulf coast region, together with the level
plains on each side of the Mississippi, was the favored part of the
South. All this area produced cotton except the parts
lying in Maryland, Virginia, and Kentucky. Throughout £ The
its entire extent were settled the large planters, rich Region,
through the labor of the slaves and possessed of an influ-
ence which gave them control in all matters social and political. A
few planters owned as many as a thousand slaves, many owned more
than two hundred, but far the larger number owned less than one hun-
dred. The richest planters were men of culture, had handsome es-
tates, and had established an aristocracy which was intended to re-
semble that of the English country gentry ; but the smaller planters
were hard-working men who superintended their own farms and gave
personal care to the welfare of their own slaves. In 1860 there were
384,000 slaveholders in the South. As these were generally heads of
families, and as there were 9,000,000 white people, or about 1,750,000
families, it seems safe to say that four-fifths of the heads of families
were not slaveholders. But the other fifth were the men of influence,
as men of wealth and intelligence are ever the men of influence.
The non-slaveholders were mostly small farmers ; and as one of the
social classes they were a large part of the population. They
were hard-working men, but as the planters bought the
best land whenever it was on the market, and as hired
labor was scarce, there was little opportunity for them to hoders,
better their condition. As the schools were very bad they
could not educate their children beyond the rudiments of reading and
writing. To the visitors from other parts of the world they seemed
unintelligent and miserable, but they were neither. They were as
keen-witted, honest, and courageous a body of yeomanry as lived in
their day; and in the civil war they made excellent soldiers. The
term "poor whites" has been applied to this class in a peculiar sense.
The South had no more shiftless and lazy men than other communities,
and the great mass of small landowners ought not to be designated
by such a term. The industry and resourcefulness with which these
people restored their fortunes when the abolition of slavery had given
them opportunity, shows that they were of the genuine American
stock, and were sound in mind and morals.
During the period from 1815 to 1860 slavery concentrated itself
in the South. Gradual emancipation reduced the bonds-
men in New England from 3763 in 1790 until there were Disappear-
none in 1850. In the Middle States there were 45,210 in livery in
1790 and 1816 in 1860. Of the latter number 1798 were the North,
in Delaware, where the number was gradually falling
from 8887 in 1790. In the Old Northwest, where a few slaves existed
470 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
before the famous Ordinance of 1787, and where others were brought
in as servants bound for life, the number decreased from 1107 in 1820
until there were none in 1850. In .the South, however, there was an
increase from 648,651 in 1790 to 3,951,944 in 1860; and this latter
number was almost evenly divided between the region reported in
the census of 1790 and that not reported until after 1790.
Changes in jn ^e South itself the slaves tended to move to the cotton-
Slave Pop- growing states. In Maryland there was decrease of 16
ulation. per cent from 1830 to 1860, in Virginia the increase was
only 4 per cent in the same period, and in North Carolina
it was 35 per cent. In Georgia and the Gulf states during the same
.period the increase was 276 per cent. The increase in the Far South
was not merely due to cotton, but to the general prosperity of the
farmers in those states. There was, also, a steady development in
Kentucky and Missouri in the same period, where farming was profit-
able without cotton, the increase being 36 per cent in the former and
397 per cent in the latter.
Much was said about the cruelty of masters towards slaves. It is
hard to separate this question from the feeling engendered by the
bitter discussion of the antislavery and the proslavery
o/thement parties. Slavery is always a hard institution, and the ne-
Slaves. gro> being unenlightened and submissive by nature, in-
vited severe treatment to induce him to labor hard and
refrain from evil conduct. Whipping was used freely, because the
masters felt it was the punishment most effective with him. Some'
masters were benevolent, some were severe and careless of the interests
of their slaves, but the typical master considered his slave from the
standpoint of efficiency, and fed and clothed him, restrained him from
the enervating vices, cared for him in sickness, and afforded him reli-
gious instruction with the object of making him a sound, moral, and
docile laborer. He did not promote his intellectual development or his
sense of self-dependence, since such a course would make the slave wish
for freedom. The iron law of slavery was that nothing should be
afforded the slave which would weaken the hold of slavery as an
institution. The antislavery agitation in the North, by arousing the
feeling of the masters, led them to revise the slave codes, and laws now
appeared on Southern statute books forbidding slaves to be taught to
read and write, prohibiting their assemblage without the presence of
a white man, establishing patrols to keep them from traveling the
roads without written permission, and restricting them in many
other ways.
The first three decades of the century constitute the mildest stage
of American slavery. At that time the negro had made a real ad-
vance in rudimentary civilization over African barbarism, and the
harsher reaction of 1830-1860 had not begun. During this intermedi-
ate period there were indications that an ameliorating process had
DIVISION OF THE CHURCHES 471
begun. The best Southern opinion openly regretted slavery, manu-
mission was encouraged in the press and on the platform, negroes
were taught to read the Bible, and a superior class was
forming within the race. In most of the Southern states How P*0-
we hear of negro ministers who preached to congregations Q^e^L the
of whites and blacks, and in one state at least — North south.
Carolina — was a negro schoolmaster who fitted for the
university the sons of the leading white people. Whatever hope was
in this softening of slavery into a milder form of service was destroyed
by the resentment of the whites against Northern interference. There
had always been in the South men who believed a rigid regimen of
slaves was necessary, but they were overruled by the more benevo-
lent element. Utilizing the popular resentment against the agitation,
they now became the majority, overrode the party of milder meas-
ures, and so captured the minds of the rising generation that by
1860 there remained hardly anything of the gentler measures but
the fact that slaves were members of the white churches and lis-
tened to sermons by white ministers.
Nothing could better show how slavery divided the country than
to observe how it divided the churches. The Methodist church was
essentially a popular organization in the South, as in the
North. Its polity provided for bishops who went on cir- S^T?*7 ..
_cuit to hold the church conferences in all parts of the union. . churches*
Its earliest efforts in the South embraced work for the
slaves, and about 1800 a large part of its members were colored. Soon
after this a controversy arose between the Northern and Southern
wings over the ownership of slaves by ministers. In 1816 it was
decided that ministers should not own slaves in any state in which
slaves could be legally emancipated. For many years afterwards
peace existed in the church, but the rise of the abolition movement
was strongly reflected in the Northern portion of the church, which
was the larger part. In 1832 Rev. James O. Andrew, of Georgia, was
elected a bishop, one of the recommendations being that he was a
Southern man who did not own slaves. In January, 1844, he married
a woman who owned slaves, and in the following May the general
conference of the church resolved that he should "desist from the
exercise of his office so long as the impediment remains." The vote
was the occasion of a long and warm debate, in which the Southern
members freely predicted that it would end in the disruption of the
church. It was carried almost entirely on sectional grounds. Imme-
diately the Southerners took steps to form a Southern Methodist
church, and a plan looking to amicable division was adopted. In
formal resolutions the Southerners declared that if they had sub-
mitted to the censure of their bishop, the position of the church in the
South would have been damaged ; and in other resolutions the North-
ern members declared that if they had tolerated a bishop tainted with
472 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
slaveholding, the church would have lost strength in the North, all
of which shows how deeply this large portion of the population had
become divided on the question of slavery.
The division of the Methodists into two bodies attracted the at-
tention of the country. Clay, in deprecating it, said : "I will not say
that such a separation would necessarily produce a dissolution of the
political union of these states; but the example would be fraught
with imminent danger, and, in cooperation with other causes unfor-
tunately existing, its tendency on the stability of the confederacy
would be perilous and alarming." The effect was seen immediately
in the Baptist churches, which though congregational in polity, were
united in a general convention. The board of missions had ruled that
slaveholders would not be appointed missionaries, and in 1845 the
Southern conventions began to withdraw, setting up in the same year
the Southern Baptist convention. The Presbyterian and Protestant
Episcopal churches remained undivided. McCormick, the inventor
of the reaper, used to say that the Presbyterian church and the demo-
cratic party, to both of which he belonged, were "the two hoops which
hold the union together." But in May, 1861, the assembly of the
former body adopted a resolution offered by Dr. Gardiner Spring, of
New York, its most eminent member, pledging the church to support
the union, and the result was the Southern presbyteries withdrew
their allegiance, and in August, 1861, met and founded the " Presby-
terian Church of the Confederate States of America." The Protestant
Episcopal church took nearly the same attitude. The Southern
dioceses, after some preliminary steps, met in October, 1861, and or-
ganized the Protestant Episcopal Church of the Confederate States
of America. The Northern branch of the church did not recognize
the division, and in its convention during the war continued to call the
names of the absent bishops. With the downfall of the confederacy
the Southern branch was abandoned and the Southern dioceses were
again represented in the conventions of the Protestant Episcopal
Church of America. The separate organization of the other churches
continued after the war, for the spirit of division had become too deep
in them to permit early reunion.
THE DEVELOPMENT or DEMOCRACY IN STATE AND NATION
All of the thirteen states of revolutionary days incorporated in
their constitutions some of the British ideals of colonial days. For
example, none of the states provided for absolute manhood
^Ori^inil suffraSe- Four states, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania,
States. Delaware, and South Carolina, were willing to allow the
suffrage to all taxpayers; but all the others had some
property requirement for voters who chose one or both branches of the
assemblies. Some of the states required that the officials should be
STATE REFORMS 473
property holders, others, distrusting popular elections, provided that
governor, chief executive officers, and judges should be chosen by the
assemblies. Much as these restrictions may seem out of place, they
left the suffrage more liberal in the United States than in most other
countries.
Soon after the adoption of the national constitution the spirit of
democracy began to make itself felt, and state after state modified
some of the restrictive features of its constitution. In this
the action of the new states, always more democratic ^xetending
than the old, was very influential. Vermont showed the suffrage,
way by establishing manhood suffrage in her first constitu-
tion, and Kentucky soon afterwards did the same. Ohio, admitted
in 1803, enfranchised taxpayers, but after her each state adopted
manhood suffrage and elected the governor by popular vote. Along
with this came demands for reforms in the old states. Delaware,
Maryland, and New Jersey had yielded to the reformers by the end
of 1 8 10, and other old states were deeply agitated over the matter.
The reformers were called Jacobins, and much was declaimed about
the dangers lurking in wild and demagogic theories. In Connecticut,
where the charter of colonial days was now the constitution, the oli-
garchy was very powerful. Seven men, the majority of the council,
had in their hands the control of the state. In 1818, after a long
struggle, was adopted a new constitution, far more liberal than the old,
although it still lacked something of real democracy and equality.
The wave of reform next reached New York, where conditions were
astonishingly bad. Only freeholders and renters of tenements could
vote, and by this means more than 50,000 leaseholders
were excluded from the ballot. A council of appoint- ?h^fonn
ment, consisting of five members, named more than 15,000 york.
officials in all parts of the state, and had become as flagrant
a political machine as ever existed in this land. There was also a coun-
cil of revision, the governor and supreme judges among its members,
which had vetoed so many laws that it had virtually made itself a
third house of the assembly. Against this system arose such a clamor
that the defenders of the old condition were overwhelmed, and a con-
stitutional convention met in 1821. It quickly swept away the coun-
cils of appointment and revision, and a hard fight followed to abolish
the last vestige of property qualification. No opposition was made
so far as the choice of governor and members of the house went ; but
the conservatives rallied when it came to choice of senators. Much
was said about the sacredness of property, the incompetence of the
propertyless class, and the horrors of the French revolution. The
best leader on this side was Chancellor Kent, who added to his lawyer's
instinct for conservatism a splendid mind and a weighty reputation.
Against him the chief leader was Martin Van Buren, just elected a
federal senator. His plea for no property qualification was effective,
474 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
and thus the reform program, with some finishing strokes in 1826, was
completed in New York. In Massachusetts, in 1820, a constitutional
convention abolished the property basis for voters but retained it for
senators.
In Virginia the privileged class was fortified behind property qual-
ifications and an allotment of legislative seats by which the small
Reform in slaveholding counties of the East outvoted the large and
Virginia"1 populous counties of the West. Large numbers of the men
of the latter section became so discouraged through the
long futile fight for equality that they moved away to the Northwest,
where privilege was unknown. At last the eyes of the Easterners were
opened, and a convention was called for 1829. The results of its
deliberation was an extension of the suffrage, but a moderate property
basis was retained. There was, also, a reallotment of seats in the as-
sembly, but it was so made that the slaveholding East retained control.
In 1850, however, manhood suffrage was secured. Slavery was a strong
support of privilege, and where it existed the march of democracy was
slow. In 1835 North Carolina made important amendments to her
constitution, one of them being the popular election of the governor,
but the property qualification was not touched. In a nine years'
struggle, 1848 to 1857, it was, however, carried through, and equal
suffrage was established. The property basis was abandoned by Dela-
ware in 1831, by Mississippi in 1832, by Georgia in 1833 and 1835,
and by Tennessee in 1834. During this period of constitutional
change many other reforms were made by the states, one of the most
important being that religious tests for voting or holding office should
be given up, and in many states popular election of judges was adopted.
It has often been said that Jackson established democracy, but it
would be more accurate to say that from 1820 there was a great popu-
lar movement toward democracy, and that he became its
Jackson and exponent. He did much to guide it, but it existed before
cratic^Re^" ^e was a presidential candidate, and his successes were
form. based upon its power. He furnished a rallying point for
the new movement, and his bold attacks on the older po-
litical leaders broke their rule and called into national and state offices
men who were in sympathy with the democratic spirit of the day.
The state which held most tenaciously to the old system was Rhode
Island. Her constitution was the old colonial charter, liberal in its
time, but it limited the franchise to freeholders. The
The rise of manufactures introduced a large operative class who
RhUdSiein W6re not Pr°Perty holders. Then followed a contest to
land — S" change the old system, but the property owners of the
Thomas W. cities in alliance with the landowners of the country were
Dorr. too strong for the operative class. Yet the demand for
reform would not down. It found an active and persistent
leader in Thomas W. Dorr, who announced that the people had an
THE DORR REBELLION 475
inalienable right to participate in government. The "log-cabin"
campaign of 1840, which was a popular movement, stimulated them to
most vigorous agitation. Great mass-meetings and parades occurred
in Providence, Newport, and elsewhere, and the plainest hints of vio-
lence were given. The legislature finally ordered a convention, but
it was to be chosen by the existing voters, and the disfranchised party
would not accept it. They accordingly called a convention of their
own, which prepared a constitution and submitted it to the people.
It received 13,944 votes in an election held in the closing days of 1841.
This instrument was called the "People's Constitution." The strong
following of Dorr now alarmed the old party, who, in the convention
ordered by the legislature, prepared a constitution known as the "Free-
men's Constitution." When this came before the people it received
8013 affirmative, and 8689 negative, votes, and was declared lost. The
most important difference between the two instruments was that the
former provided for white manhood suffrage and the latter required one
year's residence for landowners, two years for natives who were not
landowners, and three years after naturalization for foreign-born citi-
zens.
Since their own constitution had more votes than that of their
rivals, the Dorr party now announced that their scheme was law, and
ordered an election for governor and legislature. The
existing legislature pronounced such a step illegal, the
governor issued a proclamation against it, and he called
on President Tyler for aid against threatened rebellion.
Tyler replied that he could do nothing until violence had begun.
Thus the election was held, Dorr was selected for governor, an assem-
bly was chosen, and May 3, 1842, the People's Government went
through the forms of an inauguration. For two weeks Dorr essayed
the part of governor, while his assembly made "laws" for the state
of Rhode Island. Outside of the state the whigs generally flouted
him, but the democrats gave him much support, and great meetings in
sympathy with his struggle for liberal suffrage were held in Philadel-
phia and New York. May 18 came a conflict between Dorr and the
rival governor. The latter was about to arm the members of his party
when Dorr marched on the arsenal with cannon, but was kept from
actual violence because the pieces would not fire. His action fright-
ened away the courage of most of his supporters, who deserted him
in shoals, and he fled with a handful of companions to Woonsocket,
followed by whig shouts of derision. In the following summer he re-
turned to Rhode Island and fortified himself in the northwestern part
of the state. The militia were sent against him, but his followers
fled again. Many were arrested, but he escaped. Returning a year
later he was arrested, tried for treason, and sentenced to jail for life.
He did not serve the term. His followers had made so plain an exhi-
bition of strength that the conservatives relented and called a con-
4?6 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
vention which adopted a liberal constitution, and in 1845 Dorr was
set at liberty. To his efforts, right or wrong, the new constitution was
chiefly due. The victory of democracy in Rhode Island wiped out
the last considerable vestige of landed privilege. Traces did, indeed,
remain in a few states, but they were eventually removed from the
constitutions, the last of them by the new constitutions established
in the South in reconstruction days.
THE PROGRESS OF EDUCATION
While liberal suffrage advanced in the old states, educational re-
form, equally democratic, was also in full course of development.
Schools were early established in every colony, but usually
th^Ed of on a private basis, and frequently under church supervi-
tional U< sion- The ability to rea(i tne Bible was essential in gen-
Movement, eral religious instruction, and the spread of intelligence
was bound up with sound morals, so it was natural that
the churches as promoters of moral ideals should have felt themselves
responsible for the people's attitude toward education. But where
government was intrusted to the competent, as was the case profes-
sedly out of New England, there was little feeling that every man
must be educated by the government in order that he might properly
exercise his function of citizenship.
It is hard to say whether the educational impulse in early New Eng-
land was chiefly religious or political. The two functions were closely
related, and we may well say they acted jointly. Massa-
Massa8 ** cnusetts took tne lead, passing in 1647 an act which has
chusetts. been called "the mother of all our school laws." It
ordered each town of fifty families to support an elementary
school, and each of a hundred families to support a grammar school
under penalty of fine. The teachers were to be appointed and paid
by the people and were to teach all children who came to them. It
was not always enforced, especially as regards grammar schools, but
it remained an ideal throughout the colonial period, and in 1789 a
comprehensive act was passed, the terms of which show how far public
education was developed. The towns were divided into districts, with
a school in each supported by the public ; towns of 200 families were to
have grammar schools. Teachers were to be college graduates or to
have certificates of attainments from " learned ministers," and the
selectmen were to see that the schools were well taught and that
the children attended. This act was in force with little amendment
for nearly fifty years.
In 1837 Massachusetts created a state board of education, and
Horace Mann was appointed its secretary. This was one of the
remarkable educational reforms in the century. The old district school
no longer served the wants of the community. Incompetent teachers
EARLY PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEMS 477
had been appointed by officials interested in local politics, there were
no trained superintendents of teachers, and the amount of money
spent on education was proportionally small. Within
the past half century the state had grown rich. Horace
Mann realized that the old district system was insufficient,
and assumed the task of making it modern. He was in
office twelve years, and when he retired trained superintendents of
schools existed in the towns, appropriations were liberal, normal schools
had been established, the school term was lengthened to six months,
and many other progressive features were added to the system. He
succeeded because of his earnestness and capability. He traveled and
spoke much, and wherever he went he left his impress on others. It
was largely through his efforts for the schools that a revival of town
libraries spread throughout the state. His achievement was truly
statesmanlike. He found the school system of Massachusetts
large, well meant, and rather formless: he gave it that cohesion
and energy which in the political phase of society makes the state a
living thing.
The Middle states had many schools from the earliest colonial
periods, but the impulse was religious or individual, rarely public.
The Dutch made a good beginning in New York, but
there was decline of interest with the conquest of the
province by the British. It was not until after the revo- states,
lution that the state seems to have realized its duty in
public education ; and then we find land granted in the western coun-
ties and assistance voted to educate poor children in the schools al-
ready established in the eastern parts of the state. Throughout the
years 1815 and 1860 these states were gradually perfecting school
systems, many laws being necessary before a satisfactory result was
obtained. It was not until 1849 that the New York system was well
established. The same result was achieved for Pennsylvania in a law
of 1854; for New Jersey it did not come until 1867, and for Delaware
not until 1875.
Efforts to establish public schools were made in the South early in
the nineteenth century. They resulted in "free schools," poorly
taught for short periods, and designed only for the poor.
The children of the well-to-do went to private schools, j^odsin
which were numerous. Among the older Southern states ^e south,
the best "free school" system was probably in North
Carolina, which was the most democratic of the Southern states.
Little more interest was shown in the newer states of the Gulf
region. Texas, however, made liberal land grants to her school
system, and Tennessee and Florida received lands for the same
purpose from the federal government. It was not until after the
civil war that the former slave states established an efficient public
school system.
478 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
While public education thus slowly won its way in the Middle and
Southern states, it secured and maintained a more vigorous position
in the Middle West. Three causes are to be noted : i. The
Public generous gifts of land by the national government ; 2. The
Schools in to.j J./Y • f XT T- •
the West. wlc*e diffusion of New Englanders in this region ; and
3. The conviction of the Westerners that schools attracted
desirable immigrants. The lands given by the federal authority for
education went to the states, which determined their use, some going
to the common public schools, some to academies, and some to state
universities, which dated from the early days of settlement. State
aid was supplemented by funds derived from local taxes and state
laws provided the administrative machinery.
Preceding the rise of the public common school came a movement
for academies. This type of school abounded among the English
dissenters of the eighteenth century. Its curriculum
Academ covered from three to five years, and embraced Latin,
Greek, philosophy, with a smattering of Hebrew, science,
and sometimes theology. It fell in readily with the condition of the
non-conformists who had no standing in the universities and were not
found in the great public schools. It held a place between preparatory
school and university, and was pronounced superficial by those who
held to the old classical schools.
It is not strange that this kind of school was easily established in
America, where dissenters were in the majority and where the thorough
ideals of European instruction had not yet taken deep hold.
The Era of Sometimes an academy grew out of the efforts of a devoted
£ic^mies and generous family, as Phillips Academy, at Andover,
United Massachusetts, founded in 1778. High-grade academies
States. existed in most of the states and served excellently in pre-
paring boys for college. But with the beginning of the
nineteenth century came an era of rosy dreams of future developments.
Most extreme in the West and South, it was nevertheless well defined
in the North, and one of its results was an abundant crop of academies.
This sporadic growth stood for much real interest, and spite of the
failures many useful institutions survived. In 1850 there were 6085
academies in the United States, and they had 263,096 pupils.
During the years 1820 to 1860 as many as 174 colleges and universi-
ties were founded in the United States, 80 of which were in the North
Central, and 52 in the Southern, states. Many of them
h?*Sf Col~ were f°unded by churches, and many others represented the
Founded. ambition of new communities with anticipations of future
growth and culture. The law of the survival of the fit-
test has brought to an early grave a great number of these institu-
tions, but others have survived and reached positions of wide useful-
ness. Not all were wisely founded, but who shall decry the earnest
hope that gave them their beginning !
STATE UNIVERSITIES 479
It was in this period that the state university took form. The older
ideal of a college or university in America was a place at which men
were fitted for the ministry, law, or another learned pro-
fession. Its studies were strictly arranged in groups, a
thing long traditional in Europe. The students were
from the upper class of society, and there was generally some kind of
ecclesiastical oversight. Two tendencies, one domestic and one for-
eign, operated against this idea about 1800. One was the prevalence
of philosophic doubt in the first generation after the revolution. At
the same time the French educational system was reorganized on
a rationalistic basis, and the university of Berlin was established
under the guidance of Fichte. Such wonderfully important move-
ments at home and in Europe could not fail to have a corresponding
phase in American education.
The process was first seen in the founding of state universities in
North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, and South Carolina, and in the
reorganization of the University of Pennsylvania on a state
basis, all of which occurred between 1779 and 1815. At Jefferson
this time the movement took a more definite shape at the u'nlversity
hands of Jefferson, equally devoted to democracy and Of Virginia,
•liberal thought. He gave much of his later life to the
task of remodeling higher education in Virginia. He first wished to
remake William and Mary College on the secular plan, but failing in
that turned to the task of founding a new institution. In 1818 the
legislature approved, and in 1825 the University of Virginia opened its
doors. Jefferson was head of the commission which prepared its plan,
head of its first board of visitors, and his colleagues allowed him to have
his way in all that pertained to the university. It began with an elec-
tive system, and opened its doors without examinations to all who
came, rejecting after trial those who showed themselves unprepared
for its classes. All this was a part of the author's plan for a thoroughly
democratic institution.
The influence of the University of Virginia was strong in the newer
states of the West and Southwest. It extended, however, more to the
form and democratic spirit of the university than to the
method of instruction. In regard to the latter, the New
England influence has been strong, at least in the West, unvrsities.
The complete separation of the university from church
control gave rise to the charge that Jefferson's university was hostile
to religion. A warm controversy sprang up in Virginia, and has ap-
peared in most other states where the state university has been intro-
duced. As a result, the churches founded institutions of their own for
the education of their own youth. The controversy has not disap-
peared in many states to this day.
During the period of Western and Southwestern expansion the older
institutions of the Northeast developed hardly as much as might have
480 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
been expected. Largely devoted to preparing men for the professions,
most of their students came from the leisure class in the North and
South. The condition is well shown in the history of Harvard Col-
lege, the oldest of them all. In 1836, its two hundredth
Progress in anniversary year, there were 233 students in the college
ern^ol-8* Pr°Per> and in 1856 there were 382. But the law and medi-
leges. cal schools were well attended, having in the latter year 231
students, with 57 in the Lawrence Scientific School, which
was founded in 1848. The Divinity School had in 1856 only 2 2 students.
It seems unquestionable that the establishment of new colleges and
universities during this period operated to lessen the numbers who
would otherwise have gone to the older institutions. The rapid growth
of the Eastern seats of learning, with which the present generation is so
familiar, came after the civil war.
The spread of intelligence brought about a movement to reform
manners. Attention was especially directed to the misuse of spiritu-
ous liquors, which early in the century were generally used
The Tern- ^y ajj ciasses< Total abstinence societies began to be
Movement. f°rmed about 1824, and in five years more than a thousand
had been organized. Zealous preachers of temperance
went into every part of the country, with the result that many
people were enlisted in the movement. In 1830 the temperance
organizations began to be known as Washington societies. After
years of agitation the movement began to work for the prohibition
of the sale and manufacture of spirituous liquors. By 1850 sev-
eral states were in active commotion over the question. Only
one of them, however, carried the demand to success. Through
the leadership of Neal Dow, Maine, by several laws culminating
in 1851, committed herself to prohibition.
GOLD IN CALIFORNIA
January 24, 1848, yellow particles were observed in the sand on the
exposed bottom of a mill race on the American river. Workmen
washed out a portion of the earth and secured three ounces
°* golc* ^ust> and investigation showed gold along the
whole length of the river. The secret was kept for a few
weeks and then spread throughout California. In May a Mormon
walked along the San Francisco streets with a bottle of gold dust in his
hand shouting: "Gold! Gold! Gold from the American river!"
Previous reports of the discovery had attracted little interest, but the
sight of the yellow metal was electrical on the population of the town.
At the end of a month hardly an ablebodied man remained there.
Ships anchoring in the harbor were left without crews, the two news-
papers suspended because typesetters had fled, and the streets were
lined with closed shops.
CALIFORNIA'S PROBLEMS 481
Late in the autumn the news reached the East, where it spread like
wildfire. Companies of adventurers were formed, ships were hastily
bought, and by the end of the year every important At-
lantic seaport had sent out its fleet for the "Land of Gold." Jhe
When spring came, the western frontier was filled with California*0
great caravans waiting for good weather to begin a long ^49.
and dangerous journey to the same destination. More
than 20,000 persons set out by this route with their cattle and pro-
visions, and encountered much hardship before they arrived on the
Western coast as winter closed in. How many arrived this year is diffi-
cult to say, but in 1850 the population of California was 92,597, which
was more than that of either Delaware or Florida. San Francisco be-
came a city of rude huts and tents, filled with speculators and travelers
hurrying to the mines. A town meeting fixed the price of gold dust at
sixteen dollars an ounce, and it became the money of the coast. Wages
became exorbitant, a carpenter getting sixteen, and an unskilled
laborer ten, dollars a day. Gamblers and worse men abounded, and
violence was frequent. But the majority of the immigrants were
average Americans, strong in the instinct of self-government, and the
result showed that they were not willing to allow the unruly element
to dominate the country. The only authority established by law was
military, and it could not be exercised in the many camps and towns
that sprang up wherever there was gold. Nor_could it well exercise the
ordinary functions of_courts in_the_4HlQtectiQn oi life and property.
Appeals for a settled government were sent to congress, but the slav-
ery question, arose there, and for a while nothing could be done (see
page 453)-
The first move for self-government was expressed in miners' com-
mittees or mass-meetings, which dealt with disorders and settled dis-
putes. This suggested a wider organization ; and in Sep-
tember, 1849, at the call of General Riley, the de facto civil ^Otv^"
governor, a convention assembled at Monterey and made a tabiished.
constitution excluding slavery, establishing laws of prop-
erty, fixing the bounds of California as at present, and providing a
full state government. Before the year ended a governor, a legislature,
two representatives in congress, and two senators had been duly chosen.
The state officers immediately entered on their duties and the legisla-
ture took up the task of lawmaking, but the senators and representa-
tives, who repaired to Washington, were kept waiting until the com-
promise of 1850 was completed ; and it was not until September 9 of
that year that California at last became a state.
Nor did statehood bring good order at once. So deeply was the old
habit of lawlessness implanted that the state officials could not easily
secure control of the situation. Robberies, murders, and other out-
rages abounded, and the people, turning aside from the slow process
of law, openly expressed their contempt for lawyers and judges, and
21
482 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
frequently took into their own hands the task of repressing crime and
disposing of criminals. The presence of many persons of Spanish-
American birth stimulated this spirit of violence. They
Lawless- were SUSpected. hated, and mistreated. Sometimes they
ness Yields , ,, . ' . *V
Slowly deserved nothing good, sometimes they were innocent of
evildoing. Originally the miners were generally men of aver-
age peacefulness, but the excitement of the day, the tendency to heavy
drinking and quarreling, overcame good impulses, and the years follow-
ing the settlement of the state were a period of chaos, out of
Committees wnicn tne best men could see no better road to good order
than vigilance committees, which too often expressed the
mere rage of the mob. But as the communities became settled, and as
capital became fixed in mining, real estate, and commerce, the con-
servative element triumphed. The turbulent class went on to the
newer mines in the distant mountains, leaving peace behind them.
By 1858 the area of order embraced most of the state.
THE PANIC OF 1857
The discovery of gold in California and elsewhere in the West to-
gether with the rapid increase of the money supply promoted the
spirit of speculation. Railroads were built through
Prosperity sparsely settled regions from which for a time it was impos-
sible to get enough revenue to pay dividends. Manufac-
tures were stimulated, and increased their output beyond reasonable
demands. To support this vast volume of business the banks lent
freely, straining their own resources to the utmost. In fact, it was one
of those " boom" periods with which our industrial history is filled,
the inevitable end of which is reaction. It was facilitated by the loose
state-banking system, under which the banks, eager for profits, assumed
impossible burdens in order to lend at high rates to railroads, manufac-
turers, and speculators of every kind.
In 1857 the bubble could expand no further. Speculators could not
sell their lands and bonds at a profit. The Western banks from which
they had borrowed began to fail, and this communicated
the shock to the Eastem banks from which the Western
banks had secured funds, and a general panic reigned.
Generally speaking, the banks of Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New
York closed their doors, and those of New England suspended specie
payment. With a few exceptions, those of the West failed completely.
Thousands of depositors were ruined, and legitimate business was at a
standstill. Factories closed, labor was out of employment, the prices
of agricultural products dropped, and fourteen railroads failed com-
pletely.
The West suffered most ; for at this time the Crimean war was ended,
and a large area was thrown open to wheat cultivation, on account of
THE MORRILL TARIFF 483
which the price of that commodity fell from $2 to 75 cents a bushel,
entailing ruin to producers and all who depended on them. The South,
on the other hand, felt the panic less heavily ; for its staple,
cotton, was still in demand at former prices. The South-
erners, observing their advantage, felt more confidence
than ever in their assertion, "Cotton is King."
So far as the banks were concerned, the spasm was of short duration.
By the spring of 1858 most of them had resumed specie payment, and
were cautiously lending money to the traders and manufac-
turers who were still carrying on business. But this
year and that which followed were years of "hard times,"
and it was not until 1860 that industry was again in a
normal condition. This panic, like all the others in our history, was
only a readjustment of temporarily inflated business. Beneath its
swirling current was the firm surface of immense economic resources.
Probably the most permanent result was the unexpected impulse it
gave to protection. Just before the crash the tariff had been lowered
because of the unusually large sums derived from the great volume
of imports. But with slackening business came a reduction of im-
ports, and with that a deficit in the national treasury. Notes were is-
sued and bonds sold in the hope that the want would be temporary.
But through the years of "hard times" importations continued re-
duced and the minds of men began to turn toward higher duties.
Suffering manufacturers seized the moment to ask for greater protec-
tion, and the two forces combined to secure the Morrill Tariff, which
failed to pass the senate in 1860, but became law early in 1861 after
several Southern senators had withdrawn. It restored most of the
rates of 1846 and made others higher.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Few monographic studies have been made in the social development of our coun-
try during this period. McMaster, History of the People of the United States, vols.
IV-VII (1895-1910), contains in several chapters the most valuable general ac-
count. See also Schouler, History of the United States, 6 vols. (1880-1894). Some
excellent chapters are in Turner, Rise of the New West (1906), and in Hart, Slavery
and Abolition (1906). A thoughtful discussion is Leroy-Beaulieu, The United
States in the Twentieth Century (trans, by Bruce, 1906).
On the growth and distribution of population one must consult the statistics of
the census bureau, but for practical purposes they are well summed up in its bulle-
tin entitled, A Century of Population Growth (1909). Immigration in general is dis-
cussed by R. Mayo Smith, Emigration and Immigration (1890). For the op-
position to immigrants see McMaster, History of the People of the United States,
vol. VII, pages 369-384; Scisco, Political Nativism in New York (1901); and
Schmeckebier, The Know-Nothing Party in Maryland (1898).
On the influence of great inventions see : Doolittle, Inventions of the Century
(in "Nineteenth Century Series," 1903); Johnson, American Railway Transpor-
tation (1903) ; Ringwalt, American Railway System (1888) ; Hewes, The American
Railway (1889) ; Sanborn, Congressional Grants of Land in Aid of Railways (1899) ;
Wells, Our Merchant Marine (1890) ; and Bates, The American Marine (1897).
484 SOCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
Our relations with the Indians have not yet been satisfactorily described. The
>est thing for a student is to use McMaster's volumes in connection with two
official collections : Indian Affairs, Laws and Treaties, vol. II (Kappler's ed., 1904)
and United States Statutes at Large, vol. VII, in which the treaties are included.
Very valuable is Miss Abel, Indian Consolidation West of the Mississippi (Am.
Hist. Assn. Report, 1906). On the Black Hawk war see: Ford, History of Illinois
(1854) ; Thwaites, Story of the Black Hawk War (in Wisconsin Hist. Sec. Collections,
vol. XII) ; and McCall, Letters from the Frontier (1868), bears also on the Seminole
war. On the war in Florida see: Fairbanks, History of Florida (new ed., 1898) ;
Sprague, Origin, Progress, and Conclusion of the Florida War (1848).
Much has been written about the society of the South. Probably the best
treatment is the work of Frederick Law Olmstead, an intelligent Northern
observer who made visits to that section in the last decade before the civil
war and wrote three books showing in excellent literary form how Southern life
impressed one who was used to conditions in the free North. The books are :
A Journey in the Seaboard Slave States (1856, new ed., 1904), A Journey through Texas
(1857), and A Journey to the Back Country (1861). Essential parts of these three
books were published in The Cotton Kingdom, 2 vols. (1861). A good Southern
treatment, though written with the advantages of post bellum retrospect, is Ingle,
Southern Sidelights (1896) . Several delightful books of reminiscences have appeared
written by persons connected with the planter class. They are apt to be colored
by feeling and do not, as a rule, present the point of view of the middle class and
poorer whites. Among them are : Mrs. Pryor, Reminiscences of Peace and War
(1904) ; Mrs. Clayton, Black and White under the Old Regime (1899) 5 and Mrs.
Smedes, Memorials of a Southern Planter (4th ed., 1900). See also: Hammond,
The Cotton Industry (1897) ; Brooks, The Story of Cotton (1911) ; and Hurd, Law of
Freedom and Bondage, 2 vols. (1858-1862), contains summary of statutes concern-
ing slaves and free negroes.
On the development of democracy see : Dodd, Revision and Amendment of State
Constitutions (1910) ; Borgeaud, Adoption and Amendment of Constitution (1895,
trans, by Hazen) ; Lobingur, The People's Law (1909) ; Oberhaltzer, Referendum in
America (ed. 1911) ; Poore, Federal and State Constitutions, 2 vols. (1877) ; Thorpe,
American Charters, Constitutions, and Original Laws, 7 vols. (1909), contains errors
and should be used with caution. See also : Mowry, The Dorr War (1901) ; King,
Life of Thomas W. Dorr (1859) ; and McMaster, History of the People of the United
States, vol. V, 373~394.
Educational progress is shown in : Boone, Education in the United States (1889) ;
Dexter, History of Education in the United States (1904) ; E. E. Brown, Making of
Our Middle Schools (1907) ; Martin, Evolution of the Massachusetts Public School
System (1894) ; Weeks, Beginnings of the Common School System in the South (U. S.
Comsr. Education, Report^ 1896-1897) ; H. B. Adams, editor, 33 monographs on
history of education in various states, issued as Circulars of Information by the Com-
missioner of Education (1887-1902); H. B. Adams, Thomas Jefferson and the
University of Virginia (1888) ; and Hinsdale, Horace Mann and the Common School
Revival (1898).
On the discovery of gold in California and the conditions which followed see :
Hittell, History of California, 4 vols. (1886-1897) ; Bancroft, History of California,
7 vols. (1884-1890); Willey, Thirty Years in California (1879), good for early
social conditions; Shinn, Mining Camps (1885), very suggestive; and Letts,
California Illustrated (1852).
For Independent Reading
Bayard Taylor, Eldorado (1850) ; Mowry, The Dorr War (1901) : Mrs. Pryor, Rem-
iniscences of Peace and War (1904) ; Mrs. Clayton, Black and White urjfier the Old
Regime (1899); Hubbard, Memorials of a Half Century (1887), deals with expe-
riences in the Old Northwest ; Four American Universities, by Professor Norton and
others (1895), deals with Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and Princeton; and Olmstead,
A Journey in the Seaboard Slave States (new ed., 1904).
CHAPTER XXIII
EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
OVERTHROWING THE COMPROMISE OF 1850
CONSERVATIVE men North and South wished the compromise of 1850
to be final. Politicians, business men, and conservatives generally
hoped it would remove the slavery question from politics
and introduce an era of harmony. In April, 1852, the Jj^com*
house of representatives adopted a resolution to that promise!"
effect by a vote of 103 to 74, and the democratic convention
of the same year enthusiastically resolved to accept the compromise as
final and to resist any attempt to renew the slavery agitation. In the
whig convention a similar resolution was adopted, with 66 dissenting
votes, all of which came from the North, and were from men who sup-
ported Scott as party leader.
The democrats had much trouble to name a candidate. For forty-
eight ballots fortune leaned in turn to Cass, the defeated candidate of
1848, to Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, to Marcy, of New
York, and to Stephen A. Douglas, a brilliant senator from
Illinois who had just completed his thirty-ninth year and
for whom his admirers predicted the highest honors. On the thirty-
fifth ballot Franklin Pierce, of New Hampshire, was brought forward
by Virginia as a "dark horse," and on the forty-ninth he received the
nomination, William R. King, of Alabama, being named for vice-presi-
dent. The whigs also had their difficulties, but General Winfield Scott
won on the fifty-third ballot, taking the honors from Webster and Fill-
more, through a combination of the Southern whigs with the Northern
wing of the party under Seward, who led a large group of men opposed
to the fugitive slave law, a part of the great compromise. William A.
Graham, of North Carolina, was nominated for the vice-presidency.
The free soil party nominated John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, and
denied the finality of the compromise.
The only important issue in the campaign that followed was keeping
the compromise. Scott was pledged to it, but he was supported by
those who would be glad to see it overthrown. Pierce, it
was not doubted, was sincerely for it, while Hale repudiated Eleection.
it altogether. The results showed how much it was de-
sired by the people. The democratic candidates received 254 electoral
votes, the whigs had 42, carrying Massachusetts, Vermont, Kentucky,
and Tennessee, and the free soilers had none. Hale had only half as
485
486 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
many votes as Van Buren got in 1848, and this was taken to show that
the cause of political abolition was declining.
Pierce took office amid the plaudits of the citizens. He was a
handsome man and knew how to conciliate his opponents. Could he
not perpetuate the spirit of compromise, if any man could ?
Cabinet ^et ^s cabmet appointments aroused apprehensions.
Dix, of New York, who was a free soiler in 1848, was
denied a position after it had been offered him, and the reason for the
change of intention was his unpopularity with the South. Jefferson
Davis, of Mississippi, was made secretary of war, and Caleb Gushing,
of Massachusetts, a warm friend of Davis, became attorney-general.
Moreover, the inaugural address hinted pretty plainly at the acquisi-
tion of Cuba, a thing much desired by the slaveholders. It was not
long before whisperers began to say that the administration was under
Southern domination.
This seemed ominous for the spirit of compromise, but a still more
threatening thing was the hostility of many Northern people to the
execution of the fugitive slave law. In the two and a half
Opposition years since the law passed nearly ever> fugitive arrested in
F^giti™ the North had been taken by a mob f rom the hands of tne
Slave Law. federal marshal and spirited away to freedom. In Syra-
cuse, New York, Gerrit Smith and the Rev. Samuel J.
May led a mob of respectable men who forcibly rescued a negro,
Jerry McHenry, from the hands of an assembled court and smuggled
him into Canada ; and they were not punished. These affairs, which
occurred before the election of 1852, aroused the moderates North and
South and went far to secure the large democratic majority of that
year. They were, however, not forgotten, and the extremists of both
sides predicted freely that the fugitive slave law, which the South con-
sidered its only gain in the great compromise, could not be enforced.
But it was slavery in the territories, and not the rendition of fugitives,
that kindled anew the slumbering fires of strife. The unorganized
Nebraska country west of Missouri and Iowa became im-
Nribraskfathe Portant as soon as the Oregon question came up ; and the
Question*. migration to California and the plans proposed for a rail-
road to the Pacific gave it added interest. Attempts to
have it made a territory had been defeated by the slavery men, be-
cause under the Missouri compromise it would be free. The Missou-
rians themselves, though much desiring that the territory be erected,
would not demand it as a home of freedom. Senator Atchison,
leading the slavery party in that state, declared that he would " see
Nebraska sunk in hell before he would vote for it as a free soil terri-
tory " ; and he helped defeat a Nebraska bill in 1853: In the summer
of that year his seat in the senate was being contested, and his op-
ponents boldly charged him with neglecting the interests of Missouri.
To make Nebraska slave, it was said, he was sacrificing the oppor-
COMPROMISE BROKEN 487
tunity to have St. Louis the terminus of the Pacific railroad and ex-
cluding Missourians from the rich lands to the west. It was a hard
blow, and he met it by a change of front. He would never see Ne-
braska free soil, he now said, but he would vote to make it a territory
on condition that the people who settled there could decide for them-
selves the question of slavery or freedom. This, it was pointed out,
was what had been done for Utah and New Mexico in 1850. The dis-
cussion in Missouri was warm throughout the summer of 1853, and
just before congress met in December, it was taken up by the demo-
cratic papers of the East. The antislavery men could hardly be-
lieve what they read when they saw a prediction that a bill would
be introduced in congress to create Nebraska territory under the plan
just described. They did not take the prophecy seriously, and pointed
out that the proposed step repealed the compromise of 1820 and over-
threw the harmony established in 1850.
Events showed they were mistaken. In December, 1853, an Iowa
senator introduced a bill to create Nebraska territory. It went to
the committee on territories, S. A. Douglas, chairman.
January 5 it came from committee, Atchison's slavery i he Kansas-
proposition engrafted on it. The change was made with Act> l854
the consent of Douglas, whose motive is a matter of dispute.
He favored a new territory in the region through which the proposed
Pacific road would run, and he may have adopted Atchison's idea be-
cause he saw it was the only way to get the support of the Southerners.
On the other hand, he wished to be president, and as his opponents
charged, he may have merely sought Southern support to that end.
He was a self-made man, with some crudeness of manner, spite of his
great forensic ability, and more than once had been made to realize
that he was not popular with the Southern members. He now showed
them how much he could serve them. Holding together in a solid
phalanx all who wished the railroad built, those who desired the terri-
tory for its own sake, those faithful friends who wished to see him ad-
vanced to the presidency, and above all the willing Southerners, he
forced his bill through both houses and made it a law. Before it
passed it underwent an important amendment. Two territories, in-
stead of one, were now provided for, it being a return to the old parallel-
ism by which was preserved the balance of free and slave states. Kan-
sas, the more southern of the two, it was expected, would be settled
by slaveholders, and Nebraska by non-slaveholders. A clause in the
bill when finally passed specifically repealed the Missouri compromise.
Douglas expected a hard fight from the antislavery men, but he
had arguments to meet them. The bill, he said, was the only practi-
cable way to get the territory created, and the North need
not be alarmed, since slavery could not live in the region
concerned. If one spoke of violation of the compromise of
1850 the reply was that the bill did not violate, but only confirmed, the
488 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
compromise; for did it not apply to Kansas and Nebraska exactly
the principle applied to Utah and New Mexico ? For all this, it was
as plain as a barn door that the bill was a defeat for the antislavery
party, that it opened to slavery territory which the compromise of
1820 dedicated to freedom, and that the proslavery party won a vic-
tory which would give slavery its share in the unsettled Northwest,
unless natural conditions proved too hard for it. Though Douglas
carried his measure through congress, a great wave of protest was
aroused out of congress, and from 1854 all thought of the finality of
the compromise of 1850 was abandoned.
Douglas called his doctrine "popular sovereignty," since it an-
nounced the right of the people in the territory to settle the vexed
question for themselves. His enemies with a tinge of
Sever?1" contempt called it "squatter sovereignty," a term which
eignty"." immediately had an extensive use. The most striking
early effect of his move was that some Northern democrats
would not vote for his bill, or support him afterwards. They held
together, and were known as "Anti-Nebraska" democrats.
It is evident that a new spirit ruled in the country in 1854. Four
years earlier the old men, led by Clay and Webster, loving the union
and lamenting the tendency of the young men toward
New Men radicalism, united and carried a compromise over the
Northand heads of the radicals. In 1852 died both Clay and Web-
South, ster — Calhoun had died in 1850. Thus in 1854 the
militant younger men were in control on each side. The
most conspicuous Northern leaders were : Seward, of New York, an
able politician and a man of influence because he could carry the most
important state in the union ; Chase and Wade, of Ohio, both strong
debaters ; and Sumner, of Massachusetts, who was a fervid orator and
a biting foe to the slave power. In the South Jefferson Davis, of
Mississippi, a cool-headed and logical debater, was most eminent, and
by his followers was pronounced the heir of Calhoun's leadership. He
was a member of Pierce's cabinet, but returned to the senate in 1857.
Toombs, of Georgia, warm and audacious in manner, but conserva-
tive in ideas, was an able second to Davis. Neither of these men in
1854 would advocate secession, but they were ready to accept it if
necessary to save the South from an antislavery majority in the North.
Another group of Southerners, the most prominent of whom were
Yancey, of Alabama, and Rhett, of South Carolina, were avowed se-
cessionists. Among Northern democrats the leaders were Douglas,
now bitterly disliked because of the Kansas-Nebraska act, and
Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, an old man trained under the Jackson
regime, whose best asset was that he was minister to England in
1854, and so was not forced to vote for or against Douglas's cele-
brated bill.
The Kansas-Nebraska bill opened a new strife between these two
IMMIGRANTS TO KANSAS 489
contending sides, which by regular steps led straight to the civil war.
The chief events in this progress are the following : i. The
struggle to settle Kansas; 2. The organization of the re- Conse-
publican party; 3. The Dred Scott decision; 4. The j^K^nsas
Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858; 5. The John Brown Nebraska*5"
raid; and 6. The election of Lincoln in 1860. It is now Act.
necessary to take up these events in order.
THE STRUGGLE FOR KANSAS
At first most people expected Kansas to become the home of slavery,
and Missourians began to move into its fertile valleys as soon as it was
a territory. The antislavery men were not willing that
this should be accomplished without opposition. Eli Northern
Thayer, of Massachusetts, organized the " Emigrant Aid J
Society" to assist New Englanders to settle in the terri- grants,
tory. When its proteges began to arrive, an angry^cry arose
from the settlers from Missouri. The wealthy North, it was said,
was pouring in colonists to organize the country so as to exclude
slavery, and appeals were made for Southerners to help settle Kansas.
The response was ready in Missouri, and on election day, 1855, more
than 5000 men rode from that state and cast votes in the choice of
members of the first territorial legislature. Governor Reeder, of
Kansas, appointed by Pierce, who was known to favor the Southern-
ers, did not approve the proceedings, but he did nothing to check
them. The result was that the new legislature met, de-
clared some of the delegates chosen from the districts of Legislature
the New Englanders illegally elected, and made a code of
laws in support of slave property. This they did on the theory that
popular sovereignty meant that slavery should not be discriminated
against until the territory itself determined whether or not it should be
established.
By this time immigration from New England was large, and the free
state party felt strong enough to defy their antagonists. They found
a leader in Dr. Charles Robinson, who had lived in Cali-
fornia long enough to know how to deal with the chaos now Two Go.v"
Tr AH i -»«•• t i i i ernments
in Kansas. All the Missourians had done was pronounced Appeal.
illegal, and plans were made to organize an irregular
government, adopt a constitution, and ask for admission to the union.
Thus assembled the Topeka convention, chosen entirely by the party
of freedom. The other side pronounced it extra-legal, gave it no
countenance, and declared their sheriff and legislature the only legal
authority in the territory under the governor, who was appointed by
Pierce and in sympathy with the slavery men. Fortunately, the two
parties had settled in different districts, and each legislature, though
claiming jurisdiction over all Kansas, was content to exercise authority
490 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
merely over its own district. The Missourians, in their hasty en-
trance to the territory, took the rich lands along the Missouri on whose
banks they planted the towns of Atchison, Leavenworth, and Kick-
apoo. But the New Englanders, with a better sense of future develop-
ment, settled along the Kansas river, and thus their towns, Lawrence,
Topeka, Lecompton, and Ossawatomie, penetrated nearly a hundred
miles into the territory.
Early in 1856 the Kansas situation was before congress. Both
contending governments were tainted with illegality, and if the federal
government had carried out the true spirit of Douglas's
tit? East °* P0Pular sovereignty theory, both would have been over-
thrown, and new elections held. Unhappily, the country
was deeply aroused and divided in sentiment, and both the president
and congress were no more disposed to act calmly than the Kansas
settlers. Pierce, a democrat, naturally followed his party, the larger
part of which were Southerners. He issued a proclamation against
lawless men in Kansas, and authorized the governor, now Shannon, to
use federal troops if necessary.
To preserve order in Kansas was only a temporary remedy for the
chaos there. A more permanent remedy was suggested by Pierce in
a recommendation that it be admitted to the union as soon
Statehood as sufficiently populous; and in March, 1856, Douglas,
*s a in the senate, introduced a bill to authorize the Kansas
the^on- OI legislature to call a convention to prepare a constitution for
fusion. admission to the union when the population of the territory
should be 93,420. Such a convention would undoubtedly
be under the influence of the Missourians, and the proposition was
bitterly opposed by the opposite side, who demanded that Kansas be
admitted under the Topeka constitution. Then came
Warm one of j^e most exciting debates in the history of congress.
Debate. Douglas and many Southerners spoke on one side, Seward,
Collamer, Hale, and Sumner on the other. The speech of
Sumner was very bitter. He was a man of the highest purposes and
the deepest feelings; he hated slavery, and thought its supporters
entitled to no consideration. He was now highly wrought up by re-
cent events, and prepared a speech on "The Crime against Kansas,"
into which he put as much denunciation as his intense soul could utter.
He himself called his speech "the most thorough philippic ever uttered
in a legislative body." Into it he brought some biting personalities,
attacking especially Douglas and Senator Butler, of South Carolina.
The former replied in words equally biting, but the latter was avenged
by his nephew, Brooks, who represented a South Carolina
Sumner district. Two days after the speech was made Sumner was
Assaulted. , . , J , , ,. ,
leaning over his desk writing, the senate having adjourned.
Brooks approached, uttered a few words of reproach, and fell to beating
Sumner over head and shoulders until bystanders interfered. The
JOHN BROWN'S RETALIATION 491
attack left the senator with injuries from which he did not recover
before 1860.
When Sumner finished his extraordinary speech, Cass, the Nestor
of the senate, broke the painful silence of that body by saying: "I
have listened with equal regret and surprise to the speech
of the honorable senator from Massachusetts. Such a ,
. . tne incident.
speech, the most un-American and unpatriotic that ever
grated on the ears of the members of this high body, I hope never to
hear again here or elsewhere." These words might have represented
the judgment of posterity concerning Sumner's utterances, had not
Brooks's violent retaliation taken off their edge. In the days when one
gentleman caned another, he sought to overwhelm him by the in-
dignity rather than by the severity of the affair ; but Brooks attacked
most savagely, breaking his cane and finishing the chastisement with
the butt. His achievement found many defenders in the South, and
he might have finished his days, had he so wished, in belaboring
abolitionists with the many canes he received from admiring Southern-
ers. In the North his deed and the approval of it in the South elicited
the deepest horror. It did more to arouse the average man against
the South than any speech Sumner ever made. Meanwhile, all this
trouble accomplished nothing for Kansas. Congress could not agree
on a plan, and the territory continued to be the prey of faction.
These struggles came to a head in Kansas the day before Sumner
was injured. A proslavery grand jury had indicted several of the
antislavery leaders, and a posse under a federal marshal
marched to Lawrence and made the arrests. They de- Lawrence**
stroyed, on the ground it was a nuisance, a large stone hotel
built there, probably with the purpose of having it serve as a fort in
case of need. The posse contained many lawless men under slight
restraint, and there was much drinking and plundering. The news-
paper offices were looted, stores were sacked, and the house of the
governor under the Topeka constitution was destroyed. While
Brooks's violence filled every mind, news of this occurrence reached
the East and but added to the excitement.
To one free-state Kansan it seemed to call for vengeance. John
Brown, of Ossawatomie, hated slavery to the verge of insanity, and he
believed himself ordained by providence to redress the
wrong of his party, five of whom had been. slain. With
seven followers he entered the settlements of the slavery taiiation.
party on Pottawatamie Creek, took five men from three
homes, and left their bodies by the roadside lifeless and mutilated.
"God is my judge," exclaimed he, "the people of Kansas will yet
justify my course." Approve it they could not, but it was the signal
for the outbreak of a guerrilla struggle in which nearly two hundred
lives were sacrificed. This state of affairs was largely due to the lax
rule of Governor Shannon, who gave ill disguised sympathy to the
492 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
slave party. Its effect on the presidential canvass then in progress
in the states was so great that Pierce was forced to send another gov-
ernor. Geary, who arrived on the scene September 9, won the respect
of both sides and eventually restored order. He resigned March 4,
1857, feeling that he was not supported by the president.
Buchanan, who became president on the same day, was anxious to
have affairs settled in the territory. His party's platform had de-
clared for a just application of popular sovereignty in
Governor Kansas, and he wished to redeem the pledge. After much
Walker's persuasion he induced Robert T. Walker, a Mississippi
Attempt to i , f -. ., . i <• •
Restore democrat and a man of ability and fairness, to accept the
Order. governorship. During the past two years many Northern
men had moved to the scene of conflict, and Walker real-
ized that they were by far the majority of the population. He gave
up hope of saving Kansas for slavery, and tried to save it for his party.
Elections to a constitutional convention were announced, and he
urged all free state people to vote in them, promising that the con-
stitution to be prepared should be submitted to the people for approval.
The appeal was futile. Of the 18,000 voters thought to be in the terri-
tory only 2200 took part in the election, most of them proslavery.
Had his advice been taken, much trouble would have been avoided.
When the Southern politicians in Washington learned that their
friends controlled the convention, which met at Lecompton in Sep-
tember, 1857, they acted quickly. Agents went to Kansas,
and a scheme was arranged by which the minority might
C<msSu- control. The constitution as a whole was not to be sub-
tion. mitted to the people, but only the clause in reference to
slavery. The vote was to be "the constitution with
slavery" or "the constitution without slavery." If the latter pre-
vailed, the slaves already in Kansas, not more than 200, would not be
liberated. The vote on the constitution was to be taken by officers
appointed directly by the convention. These unusual details sug-
gested dark designs, and Walker denounced them openly and set out
for Washington to protest to the president himself. He found that
Buchanan was committed to the Southerners.
The country was beginning to forget Kansas, but this turn of affairs
caused it to remember. Most of all, Douglas was alarmed and out-
raged. He had risked much of his own popularity for
Douglas the ?outh> and he could not but feel that he was betrayed.
Telling the president plainly that he should oppose the
scheme, he went into the senate to make a bold speech against the con-
stitution made at Lecompton. "If Kansas wants a slave-state con-
stitution," he said, "she has a right to it; if she wants a free-state
constitution, she has a right to it. It is none of my business which way
the slavery clause is decided. I care not whether it is voted up or
down." He got little for his trouble; the South turned against him,
THE WRONG TO KANSAS 493
and the republicans could only see that he was seeking to secure in
1858 his reelection to the senate. His action defeated the bill to admit
Kansas with the Lecompton constitution ; for though it passed the
senate the Douglas democrats in the house cast the deciding votes
against it. But the English bill, a faint-hearted compromise, was
finally passed. It offered Kansas a gift of land if it became a state,
ordered an impartial election on the question of receiving the gift,
.and authorized the president to admit the state by proc-
lamation if the vote was in the affirmative. The Kansas Jjjf EngUsh
free-state party considered the bill a proffered bribe and
rejected it by a vote of 11,300 to 1788. From this time, August, 1858,
the struggle in Kansas dropped into the background, the territorial
government was in authority, and it was not until 1861, after some of
the Southern states had seceded, that difficulties disappeared with the
acquisition of statehood.
Douglas, like many other politicians, cared little for either slavery
or abolition, but wished to remove from the political field an annoying
question, and he thought his popular sovereignty theory
would accomplish his aim. He believed that other North-
erners like himself, with the help of the South, could keep
the question in the background, spite of the antislavery Northerners,
whom he rightly believed in the minority. But the South would not
play his game. It believed itself entitled to Kansas, and was angered
when the North tried to fill the territory with settlers. It met this
move, which it believed perfidious, with fraud and violence, which
deepened at each step. It was too unfair a proceeding to be permitted
by the nation, and was not in keeping with the former conduct of its
authors. It was the last desperate hope to preserve the equilibrium of
states, and its failure left Southerners the choice between submission
to the limitation of the slave power and withdrawal from the union.
PARTY AND THE ELECTION OF 1856
The whig party suffered much by the compromise of 1850. If it
repudiated the agreement, its southern wing would be wrecked; to
accept it sacrificed the good will of many earnest anti-
slavery whigs. It was freely said that the party would De** Blow
never win another victory. Although it had a strong p^^g
position in Massachusetts, New York, and other states,
and managed to preserve its national organization, its fate was sealed.
For a time it was thought it would yield place to the know-nothing
party. This was a secret political organization with the
same principles as those of the Native Americans. When
one of its members was asked any question about it he was
instructed to give a formal answer, "I don't know," and
from this came the name. As the Irish Catholics were usually
494 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
democrats, the organization naturally drew largely from the whigs,
and as it had the open denunciation of Douglas and other leading
democrats it felt drawn to those who opposed the Kansas-Nebraska
bill. By judicious combination and much work it polled in 1854 one-
fourth of the entire vote of New York, two-fifths of that of Pennsyl-
vania, and nearly two-thirds of that of Massachusetts. In the last-
named state it elected the governor and other general officers and
controlled the legislature. This silent machine, without canvassers
or other outward evidence of activity, but sweeping so much before it,
struck terror to the old party leaders. Late in 1854 it decided to re-
quire all its members to take oath to support the union, and the de-
cision drew many anti-Nebraska men to its ranks, as well as a large
number of union men in the South, mostly old whigs. In the spring
Fail °^ I^^ ^ carr^e<^- Connecticut, New Hampshire, and
Rhode Island, and freely boasted it had 1,000,000 enrolled
voters. It now abandoned secrecy, hitherto its greatest weakness.
The light of day showed that it was chiefly the old whig party under
another name, and from that moment disappeared all hope of building
up out of it a great union party. In 1856 it lost its antislavery wing
when it refused to demand the restoration of the Missouri compromise.
In this year its candidate, Fillmore, carried only one state, Mary-
land.
Meanwhile, the republican party had been organized on the basis
of open opposition to slavery extension. While congress debated the
Kansas-Nebraska bill, 1854, many mass meetings were
Republican hgjd to protest against the measure, and one of them at
Founded Ripon, Wisconsin, March 20, went beyond the others by
recommending a new party to fight slavery extension.
July 6 a convention of all who would cooperate to resist "the en-
croachments of slavery" met at Jackson, Michigan, nominated a
state ticket, and called on the other free states to do the same. The
sources of its strength, and the proportion of its distribution, are
shown in the fact that three of the nominees were former free soil men,
five old whigs, and two anti-Nebraska democrats. Wisconsin followed
Michigan's example, while Vermont, Indiana, and Ohio nominated
anti-Nebraska tickets. The movement prevailed in Ohio by a majority
of 75,000. It was, however, forestalled in the great Eastern states by
the rise of know-no thingism. But the check was temporary, and in
1855 its eastward march was resumed.
Whig leaders in the East watched the rise of the republican party
with keen interest, and this was especially true of Seward, leading
whig and opponent of slavery extension in congress. His
own Party was disintegrating : should he follow the exodus
and unite with the republicans to build up a great sectional
organization? His answer was most important; for he controlled,
with the aid of his astute friend, Thurlow Weed, the action of his
EARLY HOPES OF REPUBLICANS 495
party in the most important state in the union. He hesitated for
months, but by the autumn of 1855 his mind was made up. Plans
were made to unite the whigs and republicans, and each party met in
convention at Syracuse in September. To one of his friends who
asked which convention an opponent of slavery ought to attend, Seward
replied that it made little difference ; for although the delegates would
go in through two doors they would come out at one. The whigs
had hardly assembled before they resolved to join the republican
party, and the leaders, followed by all but a small remnant, marched
to the republican convention and took seats in good fellowship. In
Massachusetts similar results were secured by means less
spectacular. Slavery had already divided the whig party
in this state, its opponents being called "Conscience
Whigs," and the conservatives " Cotton Whigs," and the former now
generally became republicans. By the end of 1855 the republican
party was established throughout the free states.
In the South a like movement toward sectionalism was in progress.
Here the whole Kansas incident was considered an act of bad faith
toward the South, and the whigs could not defend their
Northern brethren from the charge of participating in it.
So rapidly did the party fall away that its leaders became in th south,
utterly discouraged, and the most ambitious of them went
over to the democrats, henceforth the Southern sectional party.
Two republican conventions were held in 1856. One was at Pitts-
burg, February 22, to organize the party nationally. It was cheered
by the news that the seceding know-nothings would join
them. After adopting a platform demanding the exclusion
of slavery from the territories and the admission of Kan-
sas to the union it called a nominating convention in Philadelphia
for June 17. Pending that date there was much discussion of
candidates. At first most republicans looked to Seward, the ablest
politician in the party ; but as the spring advanced they began to
think that the signs of the time pointed to a victory if the right man
were nominated. Then arose a feeling against Seward. He had made
many enemies, particularly among the know-nothings, and it was
generally said that a man who could win should be taken. The
argument prevailed, and John C. Fremont, prominent because of his
career in California in 1846, was nominated. Seward, who did not
believe the party could win at that time, was content to wait for future
honors.
The democratic convention met at Cincinnati June 2. Since the
Kansas policy was to be the chief issue it was to be expected that
Pierce or Douglas would be nominated. But so great was
Northern resentment of that policy that the delegates dared
not name a man prominently responsible for it. Thus
they took Buchanan, who had been minister to England and was not
496 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
connected with anything that had been done in America during the
past three years. He was acceptable to the South, which he had never
opposed, and he appealed to Northern conservatives of all parties,
who thought the republican position on slavery a kind of radicalism.
The whigs held a convention and indorsed Fillmore, whom the regular
know-nothings had previously nominated.
The chief issue of the campaign was Kansas, " Bleeding Kansas," as
the republicans called it. It was an unwelcome issue to the democrats
*n ^ North, who tried to supplant it by the question of
union. Did any one think the South, said they, would sub-
mit to be ruled by a president and congress elected entirely
by the free states ? Toombs, speaking for his section, said that the
election of Fremont would be the end of the union. In fact, Fre-
mont and "black republicanism" were so hateful to the South that it
was hardly safe for a man to espouse them. A professor in the uni-
versity of North Carolina who said he would vote for this ticket if it
were offered him was set upon by the press, and when he wrote a moder-
ate article in reply, the trustees of the university asked him to resign
his professorship. For the South there was but one ticket, and it was
in the North the battle was to be fought. Conservative whigs in this
section realized that the real contest was between Buchanan and Fre-
mont, and many of them preferred the former. The republicans, on
the other hand, had with them the majority of the ministers, college
professors, and literary men of the North. The religious press worked
for them. It was a moral issue, and appealed strongly to the young
men. As the campaign progressed it became evident that Pennsyl-
vania was the most critical state. All eyes centered on it, and the
democrats gave a cry of joy when in a state election in October they
carried it by less than 3000 votes. This presaged success in the na-
tional election in November ; and the hope was realized when counting
the returns of that day's battle gave Buchanan 174 electoral votes,
Fremont 1 14, and Fillmore 8. It was a narrow escape for the demo-
crats, for in most of their northern states the majorities were small.
The republicans had done exceedingly well for a party which had never
before taken part in a national campaign. The historian cannot but
reflect that the Kansas Nebraska bill which Atchison forced on Doug-
las in 1854 and which Douglas carried through congress by his brilliant
leadership was become a most expensive experiment for the slave-
holding power.
In this campaign an important part was played by Mrs. Harriet
Beecher Stowe's novel, " Uncle Tom's Cabin," published in book form in
1852, as a protest against the execution of the fugitive slave
T m' ^aw* ^ ^ad an immense circulation, and was translated
Cabin." mto many languages. It was a most earnest protest of a
sensitive soul against slavery, and it was difficult for one to
read it without feeling an impulse to do something to destroy the
SHALL THE COURT DECIDE? 497
system. The Southern people resented its pictures of slavery and
slaveholders. In fact, the condition was not as bad as it was portrayed,
but it was bad enough to cry for reform.
THE DRED SCOTT DECISION
From the time the Wilmot proviso was before the public suggestions
of the power of the supreme court to pass upon the status of slavery in
the territories were heard. When by the compromise of 1850
New Mexico and Utah were created as territories without ^ppoftl *'
restriction as to slavery, it was understood that if a question court!*"
arose in connection with slavery in their borders it was to
be referred to this tribunal. In every debate over Kansas the con-
stitutionality of the Missouri compromise was freely challenged by the
South. The logical tendency was to bring the dispute sooner or later
before the highest court in the land. This tribunal had declared
against many laws : Why should it not relieve the intensity of feeling
in the country and decide once for all the controversy which threat-
ened the existence of the union ? Beyond this was another question :
Would its decision be accepted as final by the losing side ?
Dred Scott was the slave of an army surgeon residing in Missouri
who took the slave into Illinois and Minnesota, and returned after
more than two years' residence in free territory. Shortly D . g
afterwards the master died, and Dred sued for his freedom.
The case first came up in Missouri courts, which had jurisdiction ; but
while it was in progress he was sold to a citizen of New York, who hired
him out in Missouri. He then brought suit in the federal courts. He
claimed to be a citizen of Missouri, and on that ground contended that
his case came within federal jurisdiction, since the federal courts may
try cases between citizens of different states. He also claimed that
when his master took him voluntarily into the land of freedom the
shackles of slavery fell off, and that his return to a slave state could
not be construed as reenslavement. He insisted that the Missouri
compromise, a federal law, protected him in this contention. The
two points before the courts, therefore, were: was Dred Scott a citizen
of Missouri, and did the Missouri compromise protect him? The
defense denied the first contention, and asserted the compromise was
unconstitutional.
The case was first argued in the supreme court early in 1856. Seven
of the justices were democrats, and of these five were Southerners.
One was a republican, and another, Curtis, was a whig.
At first the case attracted little attention outside of the Sc®tt £lse
court, but after a while it became known that it involved
the Missouri compromise, and the public, especially the Southerners,
began to take notice. In view of this the court had it reargued in
December, 1856, every point being taken up most carefully. Even
2K
498 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
then the court hesitated. Should it merely settle the status of Dred
Scott and his family, or should it by passing on the two fundamental
points raised exert its power in the very center of the great sectional
controversy ? To do the former would avoid the unpleasant task of
making an enemy of either Northern or Southern faction; but it
would also lay the court open to the charge of cowardice. "What,"
it would be asked, " was a court for but to settle disputed constitutional
points ? " Some pressure was brought on the court by outsiders to
get them to take up a broad attitude, chiefly by the Southerners, who
felt that the majority of the justices leaned their way. They succeeded,
and March 6, 1857, when the decision was announced, was an impor-
tant day in the great antislavery struggle. It showed that the court
was on the Southern side.
Each member of the court read an opinion, all of the Southern
justices and one Northerner, Grier, a democrat, agreeing materially.
The opinion of Chief Justice Taney was taken as that of the
CMnion majority. It dealt with two important points : was a
negro a citizen of the United States ? and was the Missouri
compromise law constitutional ? In regard to the former, Taney as-
serted that federal and state citizenship were not identical, that
Scott's citizenship was to be determined by the law in force in the state
of his residence, and that since Missouri did not recognize him as a
citizen he could not be considered a citizen of the United States. As
to the rights of the citizens of one state resident in another, Taney held
that such rights were only maintained during temporary residence, and
that the constitution did not intend to take away in this respect the
right of a state to decide so vital a point as what classes of persons
should be admitted to state citizenship. As to the Missouri com-
promise, the court felt impelled to pass on its constitutionality ; for if
it were valid, Dred Scott became free by his residence in Minnesota,
and if he was free there it was assuming a great deal to say that his un-
disputed return to Missouri would bring reenslavement. Taney ac-
cepted the Southern view on this point. The claim that congress
could legislate for the territories was disposed of by holding that the
words were restricted to the territory actually owned by the federal
government in 1 787, and not to the Louisiana purchase. The constitu-
tion, he further held, recognized the existence of property in slaves, it
gave no part of the government the right to destroy such property, and
an act of congress claiming to exercise such a right was unwarranted.
Judge Curtis, supported by McLean, the republican justice, took
the contrary view in a well written opinion. Free negroes, he said,
were citizens of North Carolina and several Northern states
Opinion in I78°' and voteci there, and he held that any citizen of a
state is a citizen of the United States, and was such in 1789.
If this was true, Taney's first point, relating to citizenship, was de-
molished. As to his second point, Curtis was equally successful.
THE CONTROVERSY UNSETTLED 499
Congress, he pointed out, was given power "to make all needful rules
and regulations concerning the territory of the United States." Taney
held that this did not apply to territory acquired after the constitution
was adopted, but Curtis disputed the point with a great deal of strength
of argument. If congress had such power, it might forbid the entrance
of slaves into a territory, and in doing so it did not violate the clause
which forbade it to deprive a citizen of property without due process
of law.
It was the fate of these two lines of reasoning that one enunciated
the view for which one side had long contended, and the other that for
which the other side had been equally earnest. One was
supported by the justices who favored the democratic
party, and the other by those who leaned toward the other Decision,
parties. Perhaps it was impossible that honorable judges
should have been uninfluenced by the storm of discussion amid which
they had lived during the past decade. The democrats, North and
South, exulted that they had the majority of the court with them and
flouted the opinion of Curtis. The opponents of slavery in the North
found Curtis entirely convincing, and denounced the majority of the
court as subservient to the slave power. The upshot was that the at-
tempt of the court to intervene in the great sectional conflict was a
total failure. We may consider it a certainty that when the court
gives an opinion adverse to the previously formed view of a majority of
the American people, its decision will be futile and its influence will be
lessened. The status of slavery in the territories was, in fact, no longer
a judicial matter. It had become a political issue, and it was not wise
for the court to undertake to settle it.
The administration party was not surprised by the outburst of in-
dignation wjiich met the Dred Scott decision, but they thought it
would soon blow over. There followed, however, the at-
tempt to admit Kansas with the Lecompton constitution Lose°°ratS
(see page 492), and this added to "rather than lessened the strength,
excitement. Meanwhile there came the midsummer panic
of 1857, which occasioned great distress in the business world. The
democratic secretary of the treasury, Howell Cobb, of Georgia, showed
little ability to retrieve the treasury from its consequent embarrass-
ments ; and when the manufacturers of the North asked for higher
tariff rates to protect their prostrate businesss, the Southern senators
objected. The result was, therefore, a diminished respect of the
powerful business element for the party in power.
THE LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATES
Early in 1858 the worst of the panic was over, the Lecompton scheme
was defeated, and there was a breathing spell in which the politicians
had time to think of the presidential election of 1860. To the
500 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
shrewdest men it seemed that fortune favored Douglas. Much of
the enthusiasm of 1856 had subsided. The Kansas-Nebraska law
did not seem quite so bad now that it was evident that
Douglas's popular sovereignty did not mean the establishment of
Earf^n slavery in a territory. Douglas's opposition to the
1858. Lecompton constitution had brought him the good will
of many conservative republicans, who could not fail to ac-
knowledge his genius, and it was even whispered in some quarters that
Northern democrats and republicans might unite to make him president.
Douglas could not have had expectations of this nature, but he took
no pains to check them on the part of others. Two years of peace, it
was believed, would go far to remove the sectional strife, and if
Douglas could be supported in 1860 by the South, the Northern
democrats, and the conservative republicans, what might he not
expect to do? True, he was unpopular in the South, where his
Lecompton votes were pronounced acts of treachery, but he was a
most facile man, and no one who knew him doubted that he would
find means of restoring himself to Southern favor before the critical
time arrived. We are now to see how his prospects were blighted
by Abraham Lincoln.
Douglas's term in the senate expired in 1859, and his party in state
convention in 1858 nominated him to succeed himself. The repub-
licans named Lincoln as his opponent, and a series of joint
debates was arranged between the two candidates. No
Arranged. other public discussion in our history has been more
important. It not only sealed the political fate of one pres-
idential candidate, and established another in the road to the presi-
dency, but it educated the North to the true nature of the problem
before it and convinced the South that secession was the only way to
escape the ultimate extinction of slavery.
In the beginning of his campaign Lincoln attacked boldly. The
time had come, he thought, to announce frankly that the war on
slavery was uncompromising, and he did it, in accepting
his party's nomination, in simple words which will never
^a<^e fr°m our history. "'A house divided against itself
Speech. cannot stand,'" he said; "I believe this government can-
not endure permanently half slave and half free. I do
not expect the union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to
fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all
one thing or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will
arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind
shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction,
or its advocates will push it forward till it shall become alike lawful
in all the states, old as well as new — North as well as South."
Hitherto republican campaigners were content to attack the slave power
for its aggression in Kansas, and they feared to lay the axe to the root,
THE FREEPORT DOCTRINE 501
lest conservatives, whigs and democrats, be driven off. They
trembled when Lincoln assumed a bolder front, and one of them was
heard to call his " house-divided " announcement "a fool utterance."
But Lincoln was in earnest, and he could not bring out the best in
him unless he spoke in all sincerity. Douglas in the course of the
debates made much of this advanced utterance, pronouncing it the
froth of abolition ravings ; but his opponent stood by it manfully,
explaining it in a spirit of far-sighted statesmanship which convinced
more men than it repelled. It was probably the most convincing point
of his argument.
Lincoln saw in the joint debate an opportunity to make Douglas
unacceptable to the South, and for that purpose asked him this
question in the discussion at Freeport, "Can the people
of a United States territory, in any lawful way, against H[ow
the wish of any citizen of the United States, exclude J>°g^e<|
slavery from its limits prior to the formation of a state Douglas,
constitution?" The reply of Douglas became known as
his Freeport doctrine. Slavery, he said, could not exist in a territory
without local police regulations to protect it, and these could only be
made by the local legislature, which would oppose slavery if the people
who elected the legistators were opposed to it. "Hence, no matter
what the decision of the supreme court may be on that abstract
question, still the right of the people to make a slave territory or a free
territory is perfect and complete under the Nebraska bill." This
utterance saved its author in his senatorial contest. When Lincoln
was urged to drive him from this position, he refused, saying he was
looking for higher game than the senatorship. He foresaw better
than the other republicans that it would kill Douglas in the South ;
for it was the negation of all the slaveholders saw in the Dred Scott
decision. The Freeport doctrine was known and discussed far and
wide. It was read most attentively by the men of the South. From
this time, Judge Douglas, try as you may, you will never again induce
the Southern friends of slavery to think you their safe champion and
defender !
And yet we must not too easily blame Douglas. He was in the
difficult position of Calhoun in 1828 and Van Buren in 1844 ; he must
give up the support of his own state or that of the section
opposite to his own. He chose, as they, to preserve the
good will of his state, realizing that here was his first
element of safety. He was one of the ablest Americans then living,
and he loved the union. He sought to preserve it by saving the great
democratic party as the last and strongest national bond then in exist-
ence. He won his senatorship, but all he hoped for in behalf of union
was lost.
Lincoln also showed himself a great American. Was it not great
to defeat the great Douglas? His powerful logic, which forced the
502 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
issue down to the narrow point of slavery or no slavery in the terri-
tories, and his courage and sincerity, which cast aside the last remnant
of temporizing and made it clear that the contest waged
Service S was no^nm§ ^ess than a war to put slavery in a way of
ultimate extinction, — these were his weapons. No man
before that day, or afterwards, wielded them more brilliantly. He
had the advantage of his opponent in this, that he appealed to a more
populous and homogeneous section, the rich and prosperous North.
It was a North ready to be convinced that slavery should be reduced
to a minority power, and his splendid strokes convinced it.
The congressional elections of 1858 showed how fast the tide ran
for the republicans. Two years earlier the elections resulted in a
house containing 131 democrats, 92 republicans, and 14
know-notnmgs- In l858 tneY 8ave I09 republicans, 86
House. democrats, 13 anti-Lecompton democrats, and 22 know-
nothings. In the senate the democrats still held a ma-
jority, having in the congress then chosen 38 members to 25 repub-
licans and 2 know-nothings. But they had lost one senator, and it
was evident that the trend of events would soon array against them
every free state senator. As the short session of 1858-1859 ran by
with no other achievement than angry debate over a democratic
proposition to buy Cuba, the Southerners came to realize how com-
pletely they were defeated, and even their conservative leaders began
to say in sober earnest that the election of a " black republican"
president would justify secession.
THE JOHN BROWN RAID
Before the succeeding congress assembled came the attempt of
John Brown at Harper's Ferry. The farther we get away from the
excitement of 1859 the more we are disposed to consider
His Idea of this extraordinary man the victim of mental delusions.
against1*6 He hate(* slaverY fervently, and despised those who talked
Slavery. of constitutional methods. "Without the shedding of
blood, there is no remission of sin," he said time and again
to those who discussed the subject with him. In the confusion of the
day no steps were taken against him for killing five men in Kansas
in 1856, and early in 1858 we find him in New York secretly planning
another bloody deed. He attended an antislavery convention in
Boston as a spectator, and turned away, saying : " These men are all
talk; what we need is action — action!" Assembling some of the
prominent leaders, he unfolded his own scheme. It was to collect a
band of devoted armed followers, seize and fortify a position in the
His Plan mountains of Virginia or Maryland, and from it make raids
into the farming communities to liberate slaves. As he
succeeded, he said, friends from the North would join him, his power
JOHN BROWN'S DEATH 503
would grow, and soon he would make slavery insecure throughout
Virginia. This was nothing less than to raise insurrection, but Brown
and the academic leaders of abolitionism were so carried away by the
wrongs done to enslaved negroes that they considered it only just retali-
ation ; and money was promised to enable him to launch his enter-
prise. News of the project came to Seward and Senator Wilson, of
Massachusetts, and they forbade Brown to use the arms which had
been collected to defend the free state men in Kansas. By this time
suspicions were generally aroused, and to allay them he went to
Kansas, where his name was a terror to the proslavery men. After
lying idle a short time he made a raid into Missouri, rescued eleven
slaves, and escaped with them through Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa,
Illinois, and Michigan to the soil of Canada. The country was
aroused, and the incident served to draw attention from Brown's
projected operations in Virginia.
In the spring of 1859 he was back in New England, soliciting funds.
Some of the most prominent abolitionists would have nothing to do
with him, but others gave money, something more than
$4500 first and last, and June 30 he arrived at Harper's Seizes t
Ferry, Virginia, thirty miles south of the Pennsylvania p^*11
line. Leasing a farm, he spent the next ten weeks in cart-
ing arms from Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, and in collecting the
twenty-one followers with whom he proposed to put his dangerous
scheme into execution. October 16, with eighteen of these men,
he seized the United States arsenal in Harper's Ferry, captured thirty
or more of the citizens, whom he held as prisoners, cut the telegraph
wires, and for twenty-four hours held his own against the citizens and
near-by militia companies which hurried to the scene. It was not until
dawn of the i8th that he was captured by a detachment of marines
commanded by Colonel Robert E. Lee, assisted by Lieutenant J. E. B.
Stuart. John Brown himself, with four of his men were taken prisoners,
seven escaped, and ten were slain, two of them being sons of the leader.
The prisoners were sent to the county jail at Charlestown to await
trial. A grand jury on October 25 found true bills, and after a fair
trial Brown was sentenced to hang on December 2.
Had John Brown been killed in the eventful night when he was
taken prisoner, the raid would have gone down to history as a foolish
deed prompted by an unbalanced mind. But the firm
and calm bearing he displayed at his trial and during the
month between conviction and execution touched the
hearts of even his jailers. In the North he became a martyr to the
antislavery party. On his trial and afterwards he declared that
he came merely to rescue slaves, and the abolitionists could see no
harm in such a purpose. As a matter of fact, he came with a thousand
pikes to place in the hands of slaves and a large number of rifles and
revolvers. It was not strictly true that he did merely what conductors
S04 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
of the Underground Railway did. But the antislavery portion of the
North, in the excitement of the moment, did not stop to inquire into
niceties. To them a man of firm heart had risked life to overthrow
slavery and was now facing a hangman's death without a tremor.
December 2, 1859, the verdict of the court was executed, the pris-
oner dying with fortitude. As the death group marched to the gallows
Executed ^ was surrounded by a strong body of militia, and fifteen
hundred troops formed a hollow square around the scaffold.
Many hints had been given that Brown's Northern friends had
planned a rescue, and this display of force was precautionary. It
elicited much derision at the time, but later researches have shown
that some of the abolitionists were eager to attempt a rescue and were
deterred only by their inability to raise the necessary funds.
The influence of the incident in the North is hard to estimate.
It undoubtedly aroused the antislavery party to a high pitch. John
Brown died for his conviction, and he did it willingly and
with dignity. But Northern conservatives did not change
Brown tneir views because of the rash attempt of an enthusiast
who did not hesitate to take the sword to redress what he
believed the wrongs of the negroes. It was to them a sufficient evi-
dence of the impracticability of the scheme that it found no response
among the slaves of Harper's Ferry and the surrounding region. The
effects on the South, however, were very definite. Up to this time the
ideas of the secessionists had not been taken very seriously by the
southern voters. Much had been said about the intention of the
abolitionists to come into the South, set the slaves against their masters,
and forcibly overthrow the institution which was at the bottom of
society ; but the union leaders there had always met it successfully
by saying this was but the imagining of men unnecessarily alarmed.
Here, however, was a concrete instance which the secessionists de-
clared proved all they had predicted; and the enthusiasm shown in
the North for John Brown seemed to the masses to confirm all that was
said. Harper's Ferry gave a strong blow to union sentiment in the
South.
THE ELECTION OF 1860
We are now arrived at the culmination of the harsh struggle which
followed the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act. The disorders in
Kansas, the Dred Scott decision, and the John Brown
Speaker Of raid divided the people of the North and South beyond
1859. possible conciliation. The prelude of the great struggle
came when the house elected in 1858 met in December,
1859, and sought to choose a speaker. John Sherman, of Ohio, had
most of the republican votes, but lacked several of an election. A
Missouri member introduced a resolution that no man should be
speaker who had indorsed Helper's " Impending Crisis of the South."
THE SOUTHERN ULTIMATUM 505
This book, by one from the small farmer class in North Carolina, was
a severe indictment of salvery from the standpoint of the non-slave-
holders of the South and called on them to support the republican party
in order to liberate themselves from the leadership of the slaveholders.
Its language was bitter, but its doctrine might well cause
to tremble the men who held the upper hand in the slave
states ; for it was as plain as day that if the non-slave-
holding Southerners were organized against slavery its doom was
written. In 1859 the book was brought out as a campaign document
with a recommendation by prominent republicans, among them
Sherman and Grow, both candidates for speaker. The resolutions
against " The Impending Crisis " precipitated a bitter discussion of the
whole slavery situation, threats of secession were freely made, and more
than once members were at the point of personal violence on the floor
of the house. It was not until February i that the contest ended with
the election of Pennington, a conservative republican of New Jersey.
In these strenuous days the Southern members freely said that the
election in the coming autumn of a " Black Republican" president
would bring dissolution of the union, and the violent state of feeling
in the South indicated that the utterance was not an idle .threat.
Such was the spirit in which the country came to the election of 1860.
When this incident occurred the selection of delegates to the na-
tional nominating conventions was imminent. Douglas was now at
the head of the Northern democracy. His opposition to
the aggressive program of the republicans won for him Douglas
the hatred of the antislavery men. It pleased the demo- |outj.e
crats in the free states and it was thought it would win erners.
the votes of many old whigs, supporters of Fillmore in 1856.
But Douglas would not go as far as most Southerners wished.
Their views were expressed in a series of resolutions introduced into
the senate by Jefferson Davis, February 2, 1860, demanding that
congress guarantee slave property in the territories. As the day
approached for the meeting of the convention it became clear that these
resolutions were the Southern ultimatum, made as much to force the
Northern democrats to show their position as to consolidate the South
in support of secession, if secession should be deemed necessary.
Douglas parried the thrust, and was told pointedly that he could not
get the Southern vote unless he accepted the ultimatum. He dared
not yield, for no Northern state would tolerate forcing slavery into
a territory against the wishes of the inhabitants.
The convention met at Charleston, South Carolina, April 23. The
extreme Southerners, " fire-eaters " they were called by
their opponents, held a caucus and indorsed the Davis
resolutions, while the Northern delegates decided to stand Charleston,
by Douglas. The platform committee reported in favor of
the former. It was composed of one member from each state, and was
5o6 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
thus in Southern control. A minority report held to the Douglas
position and accepted the Dred Scott decision. Yancey, the most
polished orator among the Southerners, spoke for his section. Re-
viewing the origin and progress of the great controversy, he came at
last to describe the crisis before the country. Slavery, he said, was
right : its existence was bound up with the prosperity of the South :
and yet with the growth of the great Northwest the South had become
a minority and was threatened with ruin through the pro-
Speech8 posed action of the republicans. The democrats of the
North had not met the issue squarely. Accepting the
proposition of the abolitionists that slavery was wrong, they had sought
to palliate: they had asked the North to withhold their hands against
the South because the wrong was not of Northern doing. This atti-
tude Yancey regretted. Had the Northern democrats frankly
declared that slavery was not a wrong, the abolitionists would long ago
have been silenced, and harmony would now reign in the country.
Yancey's speech was not a new note in the South. Many times
he had said the same thing, only to have it rejected as the counsel of
an extremist. But in 1860 the Southern temper had
vention11" cnangecl. His bold words now received the tumultuous
Disrupted, approval of his section, and the Northern democrats
were made to see how grave was the situation. Pugh,
of Ohio, a friend of Douglas, spoke in their behalf. He thanked
God, he said, that a brave man had at last spoken and the full
demands of slaveholders were made known; but the ultimatum
was an impossibility, and he declared with the utmost plainness
that it would not be accepted. Next, the convention took up the
platform. By a vote of 165 to 138 the Douglas position was adopted,
the first time in years that the plea of the South on this question had
been ignored in a democratic convention. Then rose the chairman
of the Alabama delegation with a serious and fixed countenance.
According to the instruction of the party in his state, he said, Alabama
must withdraw from the convention. As he and his colleagues
walked out they were followed by the delegates from seven other
States, — South Carolina, Mississippi, Louisiana, Florida, Texas,
Arkansas, and Georgia. North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, Ken-
tucky, and Maryland were less radical than the Gulf states, and
remained with the convention, although their delegates sympathized
in the main with those who withdrew.
After balloting three days the diminished Charleston convention
could not get a two-thirds majority for any candidate, and adjourned,
to meet again in Baltimore, June iS. When it reassembled
Tickets ^ nominated Douglas for president and Herschel V. John-
son, of Georgia, for vice-president. The seceders at
Charleston effected an organization, adopted the Southern platform,
and adjourned to meet in Richmond, Virginia, on June 10. On
SEWARD AND THE NOMINATION 507
that day they again adjourned, this time to Baltimore, June 28, where
they finally named J. C. Breckenridge, of Kentucky, for president and
Joseph Lane, of Oregon, for vice-president. Thus came to inglorious
failure the attempt, inaugurated by Clay in 1850 and renewed and
fought for by Douglas from 1854 to 1860, to remove slavery from
national politics.
Let us now turn to the republicans. After the defeat of Fremont in
1856 Seward was generally accepted as the leader of his party, and few
doubted that he would be its candidate for president in
1860. Opposition existed at isolated points, but it was
expected that he would be able to overcome it. The most
patent danger was in New York, where Horace Greeley, editor of the
New York Tribune, was at the head of a devoted band of abolitionists
who considered him untrustworthy. Shrewd observers thought
Greeley's chief grievance was that he was not consulted in the affairs
of the party, and they were not surprised when in the spring of 1859
Seward dined with him at the Astor House, and the papers announced
that a reconciliation had taken place. Simon Cameron, who controlled
the party in Pennsylvania, was also in opposition, but Seward made a
trip to Philadelphia, and the report went out that he had conciliated
Cameron also. Seward himself thought he had now arranged things
to his satisfaction, and seized the opportunity to make a journey to the
Holy Land. While he was gone occurred the John Brown raid and the
subsequent wrangle over the election of speaker ; and on every hand
Seward was proclaimed as the man who had planted the seed from
which came the plant of insurrection. L. Q. C. Lamar expressed the
Southern view in addressing the republicans of the house in these words:
"I was on the floor of the senate when your great leader, William H.
Seward, announced that startling program of antislavery senti-
ment and action against the South, . . . and, Sir, in his exultation he
exclaimed — for I heard him myself — that he hoped to see the day
when there would not be the footprint of a single slave upon this con-
tinent. And when he uttered this atrocious sentiment, his form
seemed to dilate, his pale, thin face, furrowed by the lines of thought
and evil passion, kindled with malignant triumph, and his eye glowed
and glared upon Southern senators as though the fires of hell were burn-
ing in his heart !" In the midst of this commotion Seward returned.
In 1850, in opposing Clay's compromise, he had declared that "a
higher law" than the constitution demanded the extinction of slavery ;
and in 1858 he had said in a speech long remembered that the North
was engaged in an "irrepressible conflict" which must make the na-
tion all slave or all free. These two utterances made him seem to the
South the very head of all their woes, and he sought to lessen their
fears and reassure moderate Northerners in a mild speech which he
delivered February 29. The compromising disposition it betokened
was to reappear many times in his career.
508 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
There were several other candidates, Abraham Lincoln, whom the
Illinois convention indorsed on May 9, 1860, Bates, of Missouri,
other Cameron, of Pennsylvania, no longer in accord with Sew-
Candidates. ar(l, and seeking his own advantage in the prospect of
making a combination with another candidate, and three
Ohioans, Wade, Chase, and McLean, no one of whom was likely to be
selected. Seward was believed to be stronger than any of these men,
but all of them opposed him strongly and were willing to combine to
defeat his nomination. Lincoln, whom events were soon to make so
famous, had, before the convention met on May 16, the support of
Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa, and a few other delegates, but he was little
known east of the Alleghanies. Harper's Weekly was the only New
York journal which considered him a possibility, and it placed his
name last in a list of eleven.
Making a platform occupied the first and second days of the con-
vention, and nominations were set for the third. Early indications
pointed to Seward's success, and his opponents made prep-
Nominated. arations for a rapid concentration on Lincoln, whom they
found to be the most feasible candidate. Cabinet posi-
tions seem to have been promised to the other candidates in order to
secure this cooperation, although Lincoln, who was not present, knew
nothing of the offers. On the first ballot the vote was 1 23! for Sew-
ard, 102 for Lincoln, 50^ for Cameron, 49 for Chase, 48 for Bates,
and 42 for other men. Two hundred and thirty- three were necessary
for a choice. On the second ballot Lincoln gained 79 and Seward n.
On the third, the Illinois candidate received 235!, and was nominated.
Seward was defeated partly because it was thought unadvisable to
nominate a man who had so many enemies, and partly because of the
personal hostility of men who disliked him. Greeley, whose recon-
ciliation was short-lived, was present, and worked hard against him.
When Lincoln made up his cabinet in the succeeding March, four of
the six members were men who had been candidates before the Chicago
convention. Hannibal Hamlin, of Maine, was nominated for the vice-
presidency-
May 9 all that was left of the whig and know-nothing parties as-
sembled in convention and nominated John Bell, of Tennessee, for
president and Edward Everett, of Massachusetts, for vice-
Everett, president. They called themselves the constitutional
union party, and appealed to those who decried party ran-
cor and sectionalism to help them save the country.
No one thought either Douglas, Breckinridge, or Bell could carry the
country. The best their followers could hope for was to throw the
election into the house. Everywhere they attacked the
Elected republicans and declared that Lincoln's election meant
the disruption of the union. This argument the repub-
licans derided. It was, said Lowell, "the old Mumbo- Jumbo" con-
LINCOLN ELECTED 509
jured up to frighten old women and stock speculators. Seward, who
canvassed actively in behalf of his successful rival, said: "I do not
doubt but that these Southern statesmen and politicians think they
are going to dissolve the union, but I think they are going to do no
such ohing." This assurance, reiterated in many forms, allayed the
fears of the mas's of voters in the free states, so that they were nowise
prepared for the events the succeeding winter witnessed. In October
Pennsylvania and Indiana elected republican governors, premonitions
of the result in November, when Lincoln came triumphantly through
writh every elector from the free states except three of New Jersey's
seven. He had in all 180 votes to 72 for Breckinridge, 39 for Bell, and
12 for Douglas. The popular vote was Lincoln 1,857,610, Douglas
1,291,574, Breckinridge 850,082, and Bell 646,124. Lincoln, therefore,
received 930,170 votes less than his combined opponents. In each
house of congress, also, the republicans were in a minority against the
combined opposition.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The most satisfactory general work on the period embraced in this chapter is
Rhodes, History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850, vols. I and II
(1892). Two excellent books are : Smith, Parties and Slavery (1906), and Chadwick,
Causes of the Civil War (1906), both in Hart, editor, The American Nation. They
contain good bibliographies. Von Hoist, Constitutional History of the United States,
8 vols. (trans. 1899); ^hould not be neglected. It shows much research and keen
analysis, but is unsympathetic. Schouler, History of the United States, 6 vols.
(1880-1894), is readable and accmate. Fite, The Presidential Campaign of 1860
(1911), is very complete, and Brown, The Lower South (1902), is very suggestive.
Burgess, The Middle Period (1897), and The Civil War and Reconstruction, 2 vols.
(1901), are valuable, but replete with detail.
The biographies and works of leading men are: Nicolay and Hay, Abraham
Lincoln, a History, 10 vols. (1890) ; Ibid., Complete Works of Lincoln, 2 vols. (1904) ;
Tarbell, Life of Abraham Lincoln, 2 vols. (ed. 1900); Bancroft, Life of Seward,
2 vols. (1900) ; Baker, editor, Works of William H. Seward, 5 vols. (1853-1884) ;
Moore, editor, Works of James Buchanan, 12 vols. (1908-1911); Pierce, Memoir of
Charles Sumner, 4 vols. (1877); Works of Charles Sumner, 15 vols. (1870-1883);
Edward Everett, Orations and Speeches, 4 vols. (1853-1868) ; Johnson, Stephen A.
Douglas (1908) ; Hart, Salmon Portland Chase (1899) ; Villard, John Brown, a
Biography (1910) ; Sanborn, Life of John Brown (1891) ; Dodd, Jefferson Davis
(1907) ; Du Boise, Life and Times of Yancey (1892) ; Johnston and Brown, Life of
A. H. Stephens (1878) ; Trent, William Gilmore Simms (1892) ; and Curtis, James
Buchanan, 2 vols. (1883). For other biographies see Smith, Parties and Slavery,
pp. 309-314, and Chadwick, Causes of the Civil War, pp. 347-351.
The original sources are to be found chiefly in public documents, of which the
most important are : The Congressional Globe, House and Senate Journals, Execu-
tive and Miscellaneous Documents, and Reports of Committees. The laws are to be
found in The Statutes at Large of the United States, and much valuable information
is in Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 10 vols. (1897-1899).
On Kansas and the matter pertaining to it, see : Ray, Repeal of the Missouri
Compromise (1909), gives prominence to Atchison's influence in the matter;
Dixon, True History of the Missouri Compromise, 1899, accepts Douglas's argu-
ments, but shows that he was not the author of the Dixon amendment ; Charles
Robinson, The Kansas Conflict (1892, 1898), by a leading actor on the free state
side; Blackmar, Life of Charles Robinson (1902), sane and reliable ^ Spring, Kansas
510 EVENTS LEADING TO THE CIVIL WAR, 1850-1860
(1885), fair to both sides, written by a participant ; Ibid., Career of a Kansas Poli-
tician (Am. Hist. Review, 1898) ; Fleming, The Buford Expedition to Kansas (Ibid.,
1900) ; Villard, John Brown, a Biography (1910). See also the "Howard Report,"
34 Cong, ist ses. Rept. No. 200. The attempt to adopt the Lecompton Constitu-
tion occasioned an investigation by a house committee. Its report (H. Ex. Docs.,
36 Cong, ist ses. No. 648, the "Covode Report") brought out much evidence of
misdoing, presented in a very partisan manner.
For party history see : Theodore C. Smith, The Liberty and Free Soil Parties
in the Northwest (1897) ; Curtis, The Republican Party, 2 vols. (1904) ; Fite, Presi-
dential Election of 1860 (1911) ; Macy, Political Parties, 1846-1860 (1900) ; Ibid.,
Party Organization and Party Machinery (1904). Rhodes, History of the United
States, 7 vols. (1892-1906), contains much party history carefully prepared from
original sources. See also the biographies of leading men, especially Lincoln,
Douglas, Buchanan, Jefferson Davis, and Seward.
On the Dred Scott decision see : U. S. Supreme Court Reports 19 Howard,
(1857), the official decision; it was widely reprinted at the time; Hurd, Law of
Freedom and Bondage, 2 vols. (1858-1862), reviews with much learning the legal
status of slavery; Tyler, Memoir of Taney (revised ed., 1872); Biddle, Constitu-
tional Development as Influenced by Taney (in Rogers, Constitutional History as
Seen in the Development of Law, 1889) ; Curtis, Constitutional History of the United
States, 2 vols. (1896) ; and Corwin, The Dred Scott Decision in the Light of Con-
temporary Legal Doctrines (Am. Hist. Review, 1911).
On the John Brown Raid much has been written, but most of it is partisan.
A full bibliography is in Villard, John Brown, A Biography (1910), the best of
Brown's biographies. See also The Report of the Senate Committee to Investigate the
Late Invasion (the "Mason Report"), 36 Cong, ist ses. Rept. Com. No. 278.
For Independent Reading
Forney, Anecdotes of Public Men, 2 vols. (1873, 1881) ; Trent, Southern States-
men of the Old Regime (1897); James Freeman Clarke, Antislavery Days (1883);
Davis, Recollections of Mississippi and Mississippians (1889); Con way, Auto-
biography, 2 vols. (1904) ; Abbott, Henry Ward Beecher (1903) ; Morse, Abraham
Lincoln, 2 vols. (1893); Tarbell, Life of Lincoln, 2 vols. (ed. 1900).
CHAPTER XXIV
THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
WAR OR PEACE?
ALTHOUGH the Gulf states furnished the ablest leaders of the South
in the critical situation of 1860, South Carolina, the home of Calhoun
and nullification, was fully abreast with the secession
movement. In this respect she was ahead of Virginia,
which was not a cotton state, and whose ancient Southern secedes,
leadership was now little more than a name. The Carolina
legislature still elected presidential electors, and was in session when the
telegraph flashed the news that Lincoln was to be president. It im-
mediately called a convention to consider the state's relation to the
union. Thus it happened that a convention at Columbia on December
20, 1860, declared in solemn manner the dissolution of "the union now
subsisting between South Carolina and the other states, under the
name of the 'United States of America.'"
Now appeared in all other Southern states two parties, secessionists,
mainly Breckenridge democrats, and union men. The former were
the stronger in the Gulf states, where the rank prosperity
of the preceding half century had produced a vehement
and overconfident civilization. In these states the union Follow,
had not the same force as in the northern tier of Southern
states, and it was natural that the first victories of secession should be
won here. The arguments that prevailed were the evident danger to
slavery from a republican administration and the assertion that the
South could make better terms out of the union than in it. It cannot
be doubted, however, that most of the secessionists hoped for a perma-
nent separation, thinking this the only safe way of preserving Southern
institutions. By February 4 secession was declared in six states,
South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Florida,
and on that day a convention at Montgomery, Alabama, established
a provisional constitution for "The Confederate States of
America," chose Jefferson Davis its president and
Alexander H. Stephens its vice-president, and invited the states of
other slave states to join it. Texas at this time had America."
submitted secession to the people, who ratified it on the
23d. With these seven states in repudiation of the union the move-
ment for secession halted for a time.
5"
512 THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
Meanwhile, all eyes turned to President Buchanan, a state rights
man, a democrat, and long in declared sympathy with the South.
Three members of his cabinet, Cass, Black, and Holt, urged
Attitude!0 him to send tro°Ps to nol(i the forts in the South. Three
others, Cobb, Thompson, and Floyd, all Southerners, be-
lieved in secession as a right and exercised a strong influence over the
president. They told him, and it was probably true, that to reenforce
the Southern forts would alarm the South and drive the ether Southern
states into secession. For a time they had their way, with the result
that Cass resigned from the cabinet. The president's annual message
showed that he was at heart with the Southerners. It argued
against the right of secession, declared that he would act strictly on
the defensive, and made it clear that the aggression of the South would
not be disturbed as long as the existing administration was in office.
At the same time the New York Tribune, and abolitionists generally,
were asserting plainly that the North could not conquer the South and
that the South, if it so wished, should be allowed to "depart in peace."
From this situation the secessionists took much comfort. It seemed
that the stars were for them.
These bright hopes dissolved at last before the problem of the dis-
posal of the eight forts in the seceding states. Six of them were with-
out garrisons, and were easily occupied by the secessionists.
South"1 Tne otner two were Pickens, at Pensacola, and Sumter, at
Charleston. In Sumter was Major Anderson with 84
men all told, and he showed such a spirited desire to protect the place
that the sympathy of the North was aroused for the first time in many
weeks of irresolution and delay. South Carolina, however, was arm-
ing her citizens, and during the rest of Buchanan's administration
each side lay on its arms, neither wishing to strike the blow which
would precipitate war.
One half-hearted attempt was made to reenforce Major Anderson.
January 5, 1861, the Star of the West, a merchant vessel, sailed
from New York with supplies and 204 men and officers for
Sumter. Although efforts at secrecy were made, her de-
parture was known at once in Charleston, and she was
received on her arrival with a fire by the confederate batteries
at the harbor entrance. Anderson could have silenced the batteries
from Sumter, but he had not been informed of her departure, and hesi-
tated to open fire. The result was that after coming within a mile
and a half of the fort without receiving aid from that quarter she
turned back to New York. This effort having failed, the policy of in-
action went on until the coming of the new administration. Mean-
while, Fort Pickens, with a garrison of 48 men, remained in federal-
hands.
The anxiety to avoid an overt act of force was largely due to a desire
that a compromise should be prepared by which the South would
EFFORTS FOR A COMPROMISE 513
consent to abide in the union. This hope was reflected in congress,
which created a senate committee to report a plan of compromise.
Five of the thirteen members were republicans, two were
from the cotton states, three were from border slave
states, and three were Northern democrats. They were
among the best men in public life, were desirous of peace, and
showed their seriousness by agreeing in the beginning that they would
accept no scheme which a majority of the republican members would
not support. Many resolutions were referred to them, the most notable
being a set known as "the Crittenden Compromise." It suggested a
constitutional amendment excluding slavery from all territory north of
the parallel 36° 30', and establishing it with federal protection in all
territory south of that line. Against this proposition the republicans
were a unit. It was their principle, and they said so frankly, to agree
to nothing which would admit slavery into another territory. For this
reason the proposition failed. The senators from the cotton states
voted against it as a matter of form, but it is known they would have
accepted it, if their republican colleagues had done the same. Other
suggestions of compromise were made, but none came as near acceptance
as Crittenden's. Here, as in the preceding political campaign, the
antislavery and the proslavery forces had come to the irreconcilable
stage of the "irrepressible conflict," and the committee of thirteen
could only report on December 28 its inability to come to an agree-
ment. We shall see later what part Lincoln took in bringing the re-
publican committeemen to their determination to yield nothing.
But Crittenden did not despair. He was the successor of Clay, as a
Kentucky senator, and he worked hard for compromise. January 3,
1 86 1, he asked the senate to order the sense of the people to
be taken on the resolutions which had been rejected in com- Crittenden
mittee, and Douglas supported him in a masterly speech. I^j f0 g^
Could the vote have been taken, many republicans would People,
undoubtedly have voted for it. All the Northern demo-
crats and the Bell and Everett men would have gone the same way, so
that it would have carried the North. In all the slave states which had
not seceded the result must have been the same ; and before this over-
whelming approval the republicans in congress must have given way.
But the proposal never came to a vote in the senate. The republican
senators delayed its consideration so long that the cotton states se-
ceded, and then it was not thought worth while to press the matter
further. That the compromise, if adopted, would have brought har-
mony temporarily seems true, but it is doubtful if it would have solved
the problem permanently. Lincoln opposed it on the ground that it
would have been followed by attempts on the part of the South to ac-
quire territory in Cuba and Mexico, and that the old threats of dis-
union would have recurred if the North had objected to such expansion
of the proslavery interest.
2L
514 THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
One other effort at compromise was to be made. February 4, at
the call of Virginia, delegates from 22 states assembled in Washington
to hold a peace convention. Ex-president Tyler, a Vir-
Convention. gmia delegate, presided, and the debates were secret.
Threshing over the old straw, they at last advised a con-
stitutional amendment somewhat less favorable to the South than
Crittenden's. It was opposed by Virginia and other Southern states.
As no one thought it would either satisfy the slave states still in the
union or conciliate those which had seceded, the recommendations
came to inglorious defeat in the senate. Thus ended the period of
hesitation and doubt between the election and the inauguration of
Lincoln. Buchanan, indecisive by nature, brought up to believe in
the theory of state rights, bound to the South by long years of political
and personal association, and unwilling to shoulder the responsibilities
of a situation which his enemies had created, came at last to the end of
his term without an actual resort to force. His successor, whose elec-
tion had precipitated the crisis, must decide what the future would
bring forth.
LINCOLN AND SECESSION
The actuality of secession alarmed the business interests and con-
servative men of the North ; and many republicans, who flouted the
threat of secession in the preceding November, now felt
Position8 ^ey had gone too far. Such persons turned to Seward,
whom they considered the real republican leader. They
thought Lincoln inexperienced, and were pleased when it was said that
Seward would be secretary of state. Thus, powerful influences worked
to make the senator from New York think that he alone could save the
country. He was not an idealist, and he seems to have concluded that
he must invent some plan by which the South would be conciliated and
the seceding states brought back.
But Lincoln had a firm conviction about the situation. He would
not accept the Crittenden compromise or retreat from any position
occupied during the campaign. To do so, he said, would
Firmness ^e an abandonment of principle, would not satisfy the
slave power, and would destroy the republican party. He
gave no intimation of yielding on the main question, the exclusion of
slavery in the territories ; but he said clearly that he would not inter-
fere with it in the states in which it existed. This did not satisfy the
proslavery men. They believed that once the free states gained as-
cendency in the senate progressive restrictions of slavery would follow.
They knew, also, that at no moment could secession be so well
carried in the South as at the present, when the popular terror at a
republican administration was greater than it would ever be again. If
a Southern confederacy was to be attempted, now was the best time to
launch it.
LINCOLN AND FORT SUMTER 515
All the country, North as well as South, awaited anxiously the ad-
vent of March 4. Would the inaugural address announce conciliation
or would it defy secession ? To those who heard it de-
livered it seemed to do neither. It began with an assur-
ance that slavery in the South was safe, and that fugitive
slaves ought to be restored to their masters, and it asserted
that the union was perpetual and secession impossible. There was,
also, much benevolent argument against the wisdom of secession. Lin-
coln's strongest trait, perhaps, was his loving-kindness, and he seems
to have meant to envelop his opponents in it so that he might win back
to the union all who were not past the reach of reason. As to the forts
and customhouses he said they must be held by the government, but
he promised he would not needlessly irritate the Southern people
by sending strangers into their communities to fih1 the various
federal offices. This tone of remonstrance and evident reluctance
to use force was interpreted by the secessionist as a sign of weak-
ness.
March 5 Lincoln was shown a letter from Major Anderson, in Fort
Sumter, saying that his provisions would be exhausted in a few weeks
and that the confederate works around Sumter were so
strong that 20,000 men would be required to maintain the
post. Two of the cabinet wished to hold and strengthen
the place, Blair unconditionally and Chase if it could be done without
civil war. The others were for withdrawal, Seward taking the lead.
He would avoid war, leave the seceding states to think over their posi-
tion, and use the slave states still in the union as an influence to bring
the wanderers back. Lincoln withheld his decision, but sent confiden-
tial messengers to South Carolina, who reported that there was no
union sentiment in the state worth speaking about. Anderson himself
favored evacuation, and General Scott, head of the army, held the
same view.
Meanwhile, three agents of the confederate government were in
Washington to negotiate for the recognition of independence, the sur-
render of the forts, and an adjustment of monetary losses
to the federal government through the surrender of federal Confeder-
property in the South. Opinions were exchanged between
them and Seward, who saw them at least once. With his
policy of conciliation in view he suggested they delay an
attack on Sumter, and they agreed on condition that the existing status
in Charleston be not disturbed. They were not officially received, but
on being assured through a third party that Sumter would be evacu-
ated, they decided to remain in Washington. Their withdrawal would
have been followed by an attack on Sumter. They waited until the
end of March, and when at that time they saw no evidences of evacua-
tion, they began to be uneasy. Rumors reached them of an expedition
to succor the forts. To their remonstrances Seward said, through an
5i6 THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
intermediary, "Faith as to Sumter fully kept; wait and see." Next
day, April 8, ships for the relief of Sumter began their journey from
New York and the confederate commissioners broke off their negotia-
tions.
Seward had not intentionally deceived the confederates. All he did
was in pursuance of his policy of delay. His assurances as to Sumter
were given on his own responsibility. They failed be-
Ove^uies cause at this time Lincoln had come to a decision that the
Seward. authority of the union must be asserted at all hazards. It
was he who gave the order to succor the fort, overriding
Seward's scheming and teaching him and the country that Lincoln was
a real president. Had the secretary had his way a shifty policy would
have been followed, the confederacy would have been established, prob-
ably beyond the possibility of overthrow, and the union sentiment of
the North would have been so dissipated that war would have become
an impossibility. In this sense the civil war was Lincoln's war, and
the preservation of the union was Lincoln's act.
When the confederate president knew that provisions were coming to
Sumter he held a long and anxious cabinet meeting. To fire on Sumter
would precipitate war and unite the North in defense of union. The
cooler advisers felt that the hope of secession lay in avoiding war.
Lincoln said he would only land supplies and not men if the fort was
not attacked. The more hot-headed advisers thought that the pos-
session of a federal fort in the limits of the newly established confeder-
acy was not to be tolerated. This view prevailed, and the order was
given to reduce the works. More than 5000 troops lay in
on Sumter the strong batteries around the place waiting for the order
to fire. Anderson offered to surrender in three days if not
provisioned or overruled by his government. From the confederate
standpoint the offer should have been accepted, but rash counsels
prevailed, and just before dawn on April 12 a solitary mortar gave the
signal for the attack. The bombardment which followed lasted 34
hours, at the end of which time Anderson surrendered and marched out
with the honors of war. Not a man on either side was killed, but the
fort was badly wrecked from a fire which destroyed the barracks and
exploded some of the magazines. The confederates expressed their
admiration for the heroic defenders in loud cheers; and Anderson
saluted his flag with fifty guns before he transferred his men to the
relief ships which had arrived during the bombardment but were unable
to reach Sumter. About this time Fort Pickens was reenforced,. and it
was held throughout the war.
PREPARATIONS FOR WAR
Firing on the flag dispelled the last doubts of the North. Stephen
A. Douglas issued an appeal for his friends to rally to the defense of
THE BORDER STATES 517
the union. Bell and Everett whigs were equally loyal, and within a
month the whole North was holding mass meetings in which thousands
of speakers aroused the men to take up arms. April 1 5 Lin-
coln called for 75,000 volunteers, and three weeks later for
42,000 more. He also ordered the enlistment of 23,000 ad- Arms,
ditional regulars and the increase of the navy by i8,oco men.
To these demands the response was more than adequate, and by July i,
he had an available force of 310,000. April 19 he declared the south-
ern ports blockaded. The ships of the navy were widely
dispersed by direction of Buchanan's secretary of the navy, Bloeckade
but orders were sent to hasten their return, and every
effort was made to purchase and arm other ships to make the blockade
effective. In this way, though with much confusion, the machinery of
government was set going by the master hand in the great process of war.
In the South, meanwhile, was a similar state of activity. President
Jefferson Davis was a West Point graduate ; he had rendered distin-
guished service in the Mexican war, and no one doubted his
energy and earnestness. He called for 100,000 volunteers, the s^h
and hastened the preparations for war. The attack on
Sumter showed the slave states still in the union that they must fight
for or against the confederacy, and four of them quickly joined the
seven which had already seceded. They were: Arkansas, May 4;
Virginia, May 17 ; North Carolina, May 20 ; and Tennessee, June 24.
Strong Southern feeling existed in Maryland, Kentucky,
and Missouri, and for a long time they hung in the balance, Sta*es°r
while Lincoln used his utmost tact to save them for the
union. If the war were fought to destroy slavery, they would go with
the South, but if slavery were not threatened, they would not secede.
Lincoln was very tactful by nature, and succeeded in calming the appre-
hensions of the border state slaveholders. Time worked in his behalf ;
for as the seriousness of the struggle became apparent, secession became
less popular in these states. Thus the crisis passed peaceably in Ken-
tucky and Maryland. But Missouri was temporarily in convulsions.
Jackson, the secessionist governor, refused to furnish troops at the
call of the president and made preparations to carry the state over to
the side of the South. Friends of the union, however, led Missouri
by F. P. Blair, Jr., raised four regiments, which were ac-
cepted by the federal authorities and placed under the command of
General Lyon. Then followed four months of commotion, during
which the people flocked to Lyon's standard and enabled him to seize
the city of St. Louis and call a state convention which declared against
secession and deposed the governor. Thus the danger passed in the
third of the border states ; but from each many volunteers joined the
confederate armies. At Gettysburg an important part of the field
was contested between two bodies of Maryland troops, one in blue and
the other in gray.
Si8 THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
Let us consider for a moment the relative strength of the two sides
in the war about to begin. In population the North was greatly
superior. Her 2 2 ,000,000 inhabitants confronted 9,000,000
Relative jn the South, 3,500,000 of whom were blacks. .But the
Northand' Blacks were a factor in the war, although they did not
South.*' count man for man with the whites. They remained on the
farms and produced the supplies for the army. Counting
two of them as worth one white man in their contribution to the
struggle, the numerical force of the North was to that of the South as
twenty-two to seven. The South realized this inferiority in population,
but expected to overcome it by what she considered the superior fight-
ing ability of her soldiers. An arithmetic published in the South
during the war stated the problems in terms like these : "If one con-
federate soldier can whip seven federal soldiers, how many federal
soldiers can nine confederate soldiers whip?"
In the beginning of the war the Southerners seemed to fight better
than their opponents. They were used to outdoor life, they were
fighting on their own soil, resisting what they considered
Relative an u invasion," and they were well acquainted with the
Ability!2 country in which they operated. Moreover, they drew
the minor officers from the planter class, men accustomed
to command and trained to exercise influence over their poorer neigh-
bors, who now made up the privates. Thus the Southern volunteers
took up the soldier's life more readily than their opponents, and the
Southern army was more quickly drilled into veterans. The union
troops awoke slowly to their task ; it took a long time to develop effi-
cient lower officers, but at last all was achieved, and then it was not
possible to discover any notable difference in the fighting ability of the
two armies, the capacity of the generals and the numbers being equal.
In material resources the North had a great advantage. Her
people had all the facilities for manufacturing arms, ammunition, com-
fortable clothing, and the other necessary supplies. Be-
R^sources sides tnis' the markets of tne world remained open to her
during the struggle. The South had no manufactures
and very few trained mechanics, her supplies were cut off by the
blockade, and, spite of strenuous efforts to make what was needed, her
troops suffered greatly through lack of clothing, medicines, and the
munitions of war. In the beginning she derived much benefit from
arms taken in the forts she seized, and in Harper's Ferry; but this, as
Rhodes points out, only gave her about the part of the national supply
of arms which she felt rightfully belonged to her as a part of the old
government.
THE BULL RUN CAMPAIGN
July 4 Congress met in extra session. Lincoln reported what had
been done to meet the emergency and asked for approval. The
"ON TO RICHMOND" 519
response was all he desired. He was authorized to raise the army
to 500,000 men, to borrow $200,000,000, and to issue $50,000,000 in
treasury notes. The tariff was raised as much as it was
thought the industry of the country would stand, and other The Extra
taxes were levied. Four months earlier the country congress*
seemed to prefer disunion to war, but through the tactful juiy 4<
measures of the president all doubts were now dispelled, and
a war policy was approved in the house with only five dissenting votes.
By this time 30,000 men under General McDowell were assembled
south of Alexandria, while 22,000 more under General Patterson were at
Martinsburg, in the northern end of the Shenandoah valley.
Opposing each force was a confederate army. One of An Ad~
23,000 under Beauregard was at Manassas, and another of Richmond.
9000 under Joseph E. Johnston was at Winchester, in the
valley. The whole North rang with a demand for an advance on
Richmond, since the secession of Virginia the confederate capital,
and Lincoln ordered McDowell to make such a movement. He also
ordered Patterson to keep Johnston engaged so that the troops of the
latter should not join Beauregard at the critical movement. July
1 8 the armies of McDowell and Beauregard came into proximity with
one another some miles northwest of Manassas. The confederates
were drawn up behind Bull Run, their left holding the stone bridge
by which the road from Alexandria crossed the stream and their right
extending toward Manassas. Beauregard appealed to his govern-
ment for reinforcements, and Johnston was ordered to join him. Obey-
ing instantly, he moved toward Patterson to deceive him,
which proved an easy task ; for that officer most unaccount- {j^81^? °* of
ably moved his whole army northward until it was 22 miles federates,
from Winchester. Johnston then turned backward, and
at noon, July 20, joined Beauregard with 6000 men, leaving most of
the rest of his army, 2300, to approach as fast as they could.
Meanwhile, McDowell made an excellent plan of battle. All his
force was in position on July 20, and the attack was fixed for the next
morning. While the main army rested on Bull Run in
readiness to cross, Hunter's division was ordered up the
stream to turn the enemy's left. The movement was exe-
cuted very successfully. At ten o'clock, while Beauregard
expected an advance across the stream, Hunter's regiments suddenly
struck his right, forced it back with hard fighting until the fords and
the stone bridge were uncovered, and by noon the whole union army,
pouring across the stream, threw itself on the confederates, who by
much exertion were brought into line to hold a small plateau
just east of the bridge, known as the Henry plateau. At
this point the battle raged fiercely. Thomas J. Jackson,
commanding a confederate brigade, held it so firmly that
General Bee, another confederate, exclaimed: "Look at Jackson!
520 THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
There he stands like a stone wall !" and thus originated the name
"Stonewall Jackson." But Jackson's firmness was overcome; his
men were driven from the plateau by the federals, whom McDowell
brought up with great rapidity. The confederates rallied and retook
the place, but were themselves driven off by their opponents. At
three o'clock it seemed they would not return, and McDowell believed
the field was his. At this moment Kirby Smith with a large force of
fresh confederate troops arrived, joined their repulsed
Arrival of brethren, and reopened the battle. It was the remnant of
Smith. Johnston's valley army, 2300 strong, who had hastened to
the field, guided by the firing of cannon. Through the tired
union ranks, exhausted by five hours of fighting on a hot summer day,
ran the murmur, "Johnston's army has come," and panic was created.
Seasoned troops would have held the ground or retreated in order.
The new levies under McDowell did neither. They quickly fell back
to the stone bridge — crossed it, and at nightfall were retreating in
a confused mass to Washington. No efforts of the officers
could stay them, and before morning the routed army was,
•» *• T^. n • i <* <• i • 11 v» i 11
as McDowell said, a confused mob, utterly demoralized.
The battle was well planned and well fought until three o'clock, but
the untrained soldiers could not stand the shock of a repulse. Their
terror was unfounded ; for the confederates, themselves exhausted and
off their guard, did not pursue. Had they followed promptly, they
might have occupied the capital with little resistance. The union loss
was 1584 killed and wounded and 1312 captured ; the con-
federates lost 1982 killed, wounded,- and missing. The
defeat at Bull Run nerved the North to renewed efforts ; it gave the
South greater confidence in ultimate success. Both sijies realized the
need of long and patient drill in order to make soldiers out of the volun-
teers.
Meantime important developments occurred in the western counties
of Virginia. The people of this region were generally non-slaveholders.
For a long time they had been at odds with the people east
The West- of the mountains, claiming that the latter, led by the slave-
tie^ of°UE holders, ruled the state, built railroads, and filled the offices
Virginia. m the interest of the East. The Westerners opposed seces-
sion and began to denounce it in mass meetings as soon as
the convention at Richmond declared for the confederacy. Soon after
hostilities began, they were in arms for the -union, and, joining with a
federal army under McClellan, drove out in a series of small battles
the forces which the confederates sent to hold this region. Then was
carried through a movement for a new state. The federal constitu-
tion provides that a state shall not be divided without its consent, and
with this in view a convention at Wheeling, May 13, representing 26
counties, declared that by secession all the Virginia officials had for-
feited their offices ; and it called on the people to select a convention to
THE GOVERNMENT AT ALEXANDRIA 521
reestablish a lawful government. The result was that June n, 1861,
delegates from 40 counties met in convention, took the oath of loyalty
to the union, declared themselves the convention of " re-
stored Virginia," and having purged the state of treason
ordered an election of a governor and other officials over
all Virginia. Accordingly, F. H. Peirpoint was chosen governor, and a
newly elected legislature filled the places vacant by the withdrawal of
the recent senators. The appointees were given seats in the senate.
August 6 the convention reassembled to take up the question of a
new state. It was ordered that a popular vote be taken on the sub-
ject, with the result that the proposition prevailed by a
vote of 18,408 to 781. Then a constitution was framed
for the proposed "State of West Virginia," the 39 west-
ern counties. It said nothing about slavery, but in the election the
people expressed in an unofficial vote an overwhelming opinion against
the institution, and thenceforth they were assured of the support of
congress. The next thing was to get the consent of Virginia. To that
end Peirpoint 's "restored" legislature met, and went through the form
of sanctioning the division of the "Old Dominion." Then the appli-
cation went to congress, which duly declared that Virginia having
consented to the act of division, the state of West Virginia was ad-
mitted to the union. The act of admission was approved by Lincoln,
December 31, 1861. The proceedings were most irregular, but it was
a time when the rules of peace were not strictly considered. The
people of Virginia have ever considered the rending of their common-
wealth an unconstitutional and malevolent action.
By cutting off from his government the western counties, Peirpoint's
"restored" Virginia was limited to the counties around Alexandria,
Fortress Monroe, and Norfolk — places all held by union
arms. Over these he kept up the formality of an adminis-
tration until the end of the war, living safely within the eminent!7"
union lines at Alexandria. His "state" was a farce, but
Lincoln wished it kept alive in the hope that it would furnish the
nucleus for reconstructing Virginia when her resistance should have
been overcome (see page 601).
RELATIONS WITH GREAT BRITAIN
From the beginning Europe took much interest in the war. As
England was most intimately related with the contestants, France
and other European powers let it be known they would
follow her lead. Her ruling classes, chiefly the landed
gentry, merchants, and manufacturers, felt much friend-
liness for the South, some of them because the South was supposed to
be aristocratic, and others because the South, having no factories of her
own, was expected to purchase freely of England. The confederates
522 THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
understood this feeling and hoped for much from it. They, also,
thought that since the English cotton factories depended on them for
raw material, English ships would come to America, break the Southern
blockade, and establish an outlet for the great Southern staple as well
as an inlet for the supplies which were so much needed. To prevent
this became the chief item of the foreign policy of Lincoln's govern-
ment; and for this purpose he discovered a most excellent agent in
Charles Francis Adams, son of John Quincy Adams,
Charles whom he sent to London as minister. Adams was persist-
Adams! ent an(^ fearless, and spite of the evident unfriendliness of
Palmerston, the prime minister, and Earl Russell, the
foreign secretary, he succeeded in preventing by his vigilant protest
many acts of assistance to the South. He found his chief support in
the fact that the confederacy fought to preserve slavery. John Bright,
Richard Cobden, and W. E. Forster, champions of any reform that
made for social betterment, worked mightily to arouse the
eehng for j^dle classes in favor of the union. Their influence was
the Worth. . . .. .
great, and the ministers did not dare antagonize this senti-
ment in order to open a market for the merchants and manufacturers.
Three incidents arose over which the two nations nearly came to a
rupture of friendship.
1. The recognition of the confederacy as a belligerent. As soon as
the government was organized at Montgomery, confederate agents in
London began to ask for the recognition of confederate in-
Status of dependence. The request was not granted, but the queen
allowed ^o^ ^ssue<^' May I3' ^i, a proclamation of neutrality in
Confeder- which each side was given the rights of belligerency within
ates. British jurisdiction. Adams landed in England the day
the proclamation was issued, and the action of the ministry
was considered discourteously precipitate. It also violated Lincoln's
theory that the confederacy had not the status of a power, but repre-
sented only a group of insurgents. The confederates too were dis-
appointed ; but consoled themselves with the reflection that belliger-
ency gave their privateers a standing in foreign ports, and they hoped
that future successes would compel the recognition of independence.
2. For a time the union papers were full of recrimination for Eng-
land, and November 8, 1861, the feeling burst forth when the American
ship, San Jacinto, Captain Wilkes, seized Mason and
Affair'*" Slidell on the British mailship, Trent. These two con-
federates were bound for Europe, one to represent his
government at London and the other at Paris. They had escaped
through the blockade to Havana and there taken the British steamer,
Trent, for Southampton. The seizure was on the high seas, and was by
force. News of it put the North into a delirium of joy, Wilkes was
hero wherever he went, and congress and the secretary of the navy
extended him their thanks. Lincoln and only one member of the
CONFEDERATE CRUISERS 523
cabinet, Postmaster-general Blair, regretted the occurrence. They
foresaw that Great Britain would demand a disclaimer, and believed
that in the excited state of the public mind war might occur. They
promptly informed England that Wilkes had acted without instructions,
and awaited her further procedure.
In all Britain was great indignation, for the flag had been violated
at sea. A large fleet was assembled, and 8000 troops were sent to
Canada, embarking, it is said, to the tune, "I wish I were in Dixie."
The government prepared an offensive demand for the surrender of
the confederates. The Prince Consort, then suffering from a fatal
illness, saw the dispatch, and suggested softer expressions, by which it
was possible for the American government to accept the demands,
Mason and Slidell were released, but no apology was made.
In a long reply Seward stated the American position.
Had Wilkes seized the Trent and sent her before an ad-
miralty court he would have been within his right. As it
was, he had exercised the right of search, something the American
government had ever opposed. Thus ended the Trent affair at the
very close of 1861.
3. The other irritating incident was fitting out cruisers for the
confederacy, certainly a violation of the neutrality England had
so hurriedly announced. In March, 1862, the Florida,
built at Liverpool, was allowed to depart for Nassau, in ^he Con-
the Bahamas, where she was libeled for violation of neu- g^*™*6
trality. But a court ordered her release, and she sailed on Florida.
a career of destruction as a confederate ship.
Meanwhile, a more powerful ship was being built at the same place
— evidently for the same purpose. June 23 our minister, Adams,
asked for an inquiry to see if she ought to be held. A
superficial investigation was made by the Liverpool authori- JJ Jawia>
ties, who were in sympathy with the South and who re-
ported that no evidence was found that the ship was destined for that
country. Still Adams persisted, securing undoubted evidence, which
was referred to Sir John Harding, Queen's Advocate. Harding was
on the verge of a mental collapse, and the papers lay unopened by
him for five days before they came to other hands, and were so reported
that the order to detain the ship was given on July 29. But the step
was too long deferred ; for on the same morning the steamer got out
to sea for a trial trip and did not come back. She went to the Azores,
where she took on her armor and a confederate crew and began her
momentous career as the commerce destroyer, Alabama. Ten years
later an arbitration court at Geneva declared that England had not
used due diligence in enforcing neutrality in regard to these two ships.
Early in 1863 it became known that three other powerful ships were
under construction at Liverpool, but the government prevented their
departure. The Florida and the Alabama, with some smaller ships,
524 THE OUTBREAK OF THE CIVIL WAR
constituted the confederate navy. They were not able to meet the
ships of the union, and contented themselves with destroying unarmed
merchantmen, of which during the course of the war they took 285,
at a total loss of about $15,000,000.
These three incidents, so full of possible misfortune for those who
struggled to preserve the union, thus ended favorably to the North.
The South found herself disappointed in her hope of foreign
a^' anc* ^e war sett^e(^ down to a long-drawn out assault
North. °f one section against the other. The point on which the
decision of England and France turned was slavery.
Spite of all that the Southerners said, the real question was the per-
petuity of slavery, and the world abroad was not prepared to support
the side which upheld it.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The general works are : Rhodes, History of the United States, 7 vols. (1892-1907) ;
Schouler, The United States under the Constitution, 6 vols. (1880-1897) ; Chadwick,
Causes of the Civil War (1906) ; Hosmer, The Appeal to Arms (1907) ; von Hoist,
Constitutional History of the United ^States, 8 vols. (ed. 1899) ; Greeley, The American
Conflict, 2 vols. (1864), valuable for extracts from documents; Draper, History
of the Civil War, 3 vols. (1871); Ropes, Story of the Civil War, 2 vols. (1899), un-
finished but continued by Livermore, two vols., announced in 1913 ; and Reed,
Brother's War (1905), a recent Southern book.
For works and biographies of leading men see : Nicolay and Hay, Abraham Lin-
coln, a History, 10 vols. (1890) ; Ibid., edr., Complete Works of Lincoln, 2 vols.
(1904) ; Baker, edr., Seward Works, 5 vols. (1853-1884) ; Autobiography of Seward
(1877) ; Bancroft, Life of Seward, 2 vols. (1900) ; Mr. Buchanan's Administra-
tion on the Eve of the Rebellion (1866), Buchanan's own defense; Moore, edr.,
Works of James Buchanan, 12 vols. (1908-1911) ; Curtis, James Buchanan, 2 vols.
(1883) ; Coleman, Life of John J. Crittenden, 2 vols. (1871) ; Welles, edr., Diary
of Gideon Welles, 3 vols. (1911); John Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years, 2
vols. (1895) ; Julian, Political Recollections (1884) ; McClure, Lincoln and Men of
War Times (ed. 1894) ; Black, edr., Essays and Speeches of J. S. Black, with a Bio-
graphical Sketch (1885) ; Alfriend, Life of Je/erson Davis (1868) ; Johnston and
Browne, Alexander H. Stephens (1878); A vary, edr., Autobiography of Alexander
H. Stephens (1910) ; Pendleton, Alexander H. Stephens (1907) ; Wise, Seven Dec-
ades of the Union (1881) ; Trescott, Negotiations between South Carolina and Presi-
dent Buchanan (Am. Hist. Review, 1908) ; and Hart, Salmon Portland Chase (1899).
On this brief period the important public documents are in : Richardson, Mes-
sages and Papers of the Presidents, 10 vols. (1896-1897) ; The Congressional Globe,
for the debates ; War of the Rebellion, Official Records, very full for military affairs
North and South; Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies; and Poore,
Descriptive Catalogue of Government Publications, 1774-1881 (1885). Of great
value are the newspapers and periodicals of the times, especially the Tribune,
Evening Post, and Times, of New York, the Boston Advertiser, the Springfield
Republican, the Albany Evening Journal, the Chicago Tribune, the Philadelphia
North American, the Richmond Enquirer, the Charleston Mercury, and the Wash-
ington Union.
On the struggle in the border states see: Harding, Missouri Party Struggles
(Am. Hist. Assn. Reports, 1890); Snead, Fight for Missouri (1886) ; Woodward,
Nathaniel Lyon (1862) ; Brown, Baltimore and April 19, 1861 (1887) ; and Mc-
Carthy, Lincoln's Plan of Reconstruction (1901), for the creation of West Virginia.
Many books of personal observations have appeared, among them the following
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 525
•
of much value : Russell, My Diary North and South (1862), by an intelligent cor-
respondent of the London Times; Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary, 2 vols. (1866) ;
Gurowski, Diary from March 4, 1861, to November 12, 1862 (1862) ; and Pike,
First Blows of the Civil War (1879).
On the fall of Fort Sumter see : Crawford, Genesis of the Civil War (1887) ;
Doubleday, Reminiscences of Forts Sumter and Moidtrie (1876) ; and Roman,
Military Operations of General Beauregard, 2 vols. (1884).
Books in sympathy with the South are : Jefferson Davis, Rise and Fall of the
Confederate Government, 2 vols. (1881); Stephens, War between the States, 2 vols.
(1867) ; Curry, The Southern States in Relation to the United States (1894) ; Fowler,
Sectional Controversy (1865) ; Du Bose, Life of W. L. Yancey (1896) ; and Wise,
Life of Henry A. Wise (1899).
For Independent Reading
Russell, My Diary North and South (1862) ; Reuben Davis, Recollections of
Mississippi and Mississippians (1900) ; Wilmer, Recent Past from a Southern
Standpoint (1900) ; Clayton, White and Black under the Old Regime (1899) ; Morse,
Life of Lincoln, 2 vols. (1893); Riddle, Recollections of War Times (1895); and
Forney, Anecdotes of Public Men (1873).
CHAPTER XXV
THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
A BIFURCATED INVASION
THE task of the North was to enter Southern territory, suppress re-
sistance, and restore the authority of the union : that of the confeder-
acy was to resist conquest. The Northern invasion was a bifurcated
movement, one part operating on the east and the other on the west
of the Appalachian mountains. It was hoped that each would roll
back the confederate resistance and, by uniting below the southern
end of the mountain system, give the finishing stroke to the confeder-
acy somewhere in northern Georgia. As it fell out, the union ad-
vance was checked by Lee's army in the East, but it was steadily suc-
cessful in the West. The Mississippi river and all of Tennessee were
gradually secured, and by the middle of 1864 northern Georgia was
occupied by a strong and victorious army. The western division had
done its allotted task, and now turned northward to help the Eastern
troops complete the capture of Richmond. The present chapter will
describe as a whole the Western movements and the succeeding chapter
will deal with the operations in the East.
THREE PRELIMINARY OPERATIONS, 1861
The conquest of the West began properly in 1862, but in 1861
there were three important preliminary episodes : i . While the people
of western Virginia were busy creating a new state a union
Virginia army under General McClellan drove back the confederate
forces which came from the east to maintain the Virginia
authority. In several sharp engagements McClellan's fame was es-
tablished, and he was called to Washington to command a greater
army. In the western counties he was succeeded by Rosecrans, who
had Robert E. Lee for an opponent. Lee's force was inadequate, and
was forced over the mountains, and it was not until he had won his
brilliant victories in the campaign around Richmond in the following
year that the Southern people forgot his present ill fortune. 2. The
. success of the unionists in preventing secession in Missouri
' (see page 517) was followed by a determined confederate
effort to retake the state by arms. At first it seemed successful, and
the federal General Lyon was killed. But he was avenged by General
526
THE ADVANCE ON NASHVILLE 527
Pope, who with a strong force drove the confederate army out of
Missouri. Late in 1861 Halleck was given command on both sides of
the Mississippi, with headquarters at St. Louis. He well understood
the art of war, but proved slow in execution. Under him, however,
served several brilliant generals, and affairs in his department pro-
gressed favorably. 3. The confederates wished to make
the Ohio river their line of defense, although they had not
troops enough to hold Kentucky. But in September,
1 86 1, General Grant, then acting under Fremont, defeated this plan
by seizing Paducah and Cairo. The result was that the enemy estab-
lished his lines from the Mississippi at Island No. 10, New Madrid, and
Columbus, thence eastward to Forts Henry on the Tennessee and
Donelson on the Cumberland, and after that at Bowling Green, Ken-
tucky, a place nearly due north of Nashville, with which it was con-
nected by sixty miles of railroad. To the eastward a small force oc-
cupied central and eastern Kentucky, where union sentiment was
strong ; but a federal force drove it back in January, 1862. By these
three preliminary movements the border states of Missouri and Ken-
tucky, which Lincoln's tact had kept from secession, and the new state
of West Virginia, were saved from the confederate arms. From that
time the fiercest field of western operations was Tennessee.
GRANT'S CAMPAIGN ON THE TENNESSEE, 1862
Late in January Grant formed a plan to cut the confederate line at
Forts Henry and Donelson, only eleven miles apart. Receiving per-
mission from Halleck he moved up the Tennessee with
1 7,000 men and seven gunboats. The confederates did not
allow themselves to be surrounded, and surrendered the place
after most of its defenders had withdrawn to Fort Donelson (February
6), which Grant lost no time in attacking. He sent his gunboats back
to the Ohio and up the Cumberland, while he marched overland to
Donelson. Here the first attack of the boats was repulsed, and they
retired for repairs. Then Grant threw his force around the fort on the
land side and was in a position to starve or storm it. For such a fate
the occupants would not wait. At dawn on February 15 they at-
tacked and drove back the union right, so that for a few hours the road
was open. Grant was four miles away, and rode hurriedly
to the danger point. Learning that the knapsacks of the ^f^6
captured confederates were filled with food, he divined Donelson.
that an escape was intended, and ordered an assault along
all his line. It was delivered with great spirit, the confederate de-
fenses were penetrated, and retreat was made impossible. During the
night the generals in the fort, Floyd, Pillow, and Buckner, decided
that surrender was necessary. Floyd had been Buchanan's secretary of
war, and feared to be taken prisoner. He handed over the command
528 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
and escaped across the river in a skiff under cover of darkness. Two
small steamboats arrived at dawn, and on them Pillow and some troops
escaped. A body of cavalry under Forrest, who was soon to be a noted
leader of light-horse troops, escaped along the river bank. The rest
of the confederates, nearly 15,000, were surrendered by Buckner. In
this action the union army numbered 27,000.
The situation in Tennessee now shifted rapidly. Albert Sidney
Johnston, in chief command of the confederates, hurriedly withdrew
the force from Bowling Green to Nashville, and Buell,
ransack who had been watching it:> Allowed leisurely. If he and
to Corinth. Grant united their armies, the story of Fort Donelson would
be repeated at the state capital. Johnston was too wise to
be caught in a trap, and continued to retreat, spite of the censure of the
Southern press. He finally halted at Corinth, Mississippi, important
because it commanded the railroad from Chattanooga to Memphis.
While he collected supplies and reinforcements his opponents leisurely
overran western Tennessee.
March 17 Grant, following the Tennessee river, arrived at Savannah
with 45,000 men. Buell, with 35,000, was approaching from the
northeast, and the plan was that the two forces should
c^fid8 t unite and crush Johnston, who had only 40,000. Grant
Approach. thought his opponents could not take the offensive, and
carelessly placed five divisions at Pittsburg Landing, on
the west side of the river, twenty-three miles from Corinth, holding
Lew Wallace's division at Crump's Landing, five miles north of that
point. He failed to intrench, though ordered to do so by Halleck,
and had his headquarters at Savannah, eight miles north of his main
force and on the opposite side of the river. He was daily expecting
Buell, who, in fact, reached Savannah April 5, where he was allowed to
halt.
Johnston was an able general, and was anxious to fight before Buell
came up. Moving out of Corinth, he fell on the union force in the
early morning of April 6. Grant heard the firing, and
of Shik»h e hastened to the scene by boat. To his surprise, he found
a heavy battle in progress, and his men fighting for their
lives. He ordered Wallace and Buell to come up, and calmly watched
the fray. Throughout the whole day the fighting continued, the
federals being driven back, and Shiloh Church, the key of the field,
was taken by Johnston, who, fighting with great courage, was struck
in the leg as he led a regiment into a hazardous charge. He had pre-
viously ordered his surgeon to attend to the wounded elsewhere, and
bled to death before aid could be found. His death discouraged his
men, who, however, at nightfall held the ground the union force
occupied in the morning and had forced their foe to take protection
under the fire of the union gunboats. In the night Grant received
20,000 fresh troops from Wallace and Buell, and next morning renewed
WEST TENNESSEE RECOVERED 529
the battle. After eight hours of fighting on this day, the confederates
withdrew to Corinth. The total union loss was 13,000 killed, wounded,
and captured. The total confederate loss was 10,700. TheResult
Johnston fought to crush his opponent and to drive him
from his advanced position in the heart of the confederate southwest,
and since that object was not achieved, the battle of Shiloh, as it is
called, was a confederate defeat. Halleck now came to Pittsburg
Landing in person, and after raising the army to 100,000 men, moved
cautiously on Corinth. When he was ready to besiege it, the confed-
erates withdrew and allowed him to have it without endangering their
safety.
The campaign on the Tennessee river left exposed the confederate
posts on the upper Mississippi. Columbus was abandoned, New
Madrid and Island No. 10 were invested and taken by
Pope in March and April with more than 7000 prisoners. ?,uc^s ?n
^ i i j ^1. j T j t the Missis-
Gunboats then passed down the river, and June 5 and 6, sippi
a week after Corinth was taken, Fort Pillow and Memphis
were in union hands. Meanwhile, a naval expedition under Farragut,
aided by Porter, had appeared in the lower Mississippi. After
futilely bombarding the forts on the river for five days, Farragut with
great daring ran past them safely, and April 25 New Orleans fell into
his hands, receiving a garrison of 2500 men under Benjamin F. Butler.
The forts then surrendered to Porter.
CONFEDERATE COUNTER-MOVEMENT IN TENNESSEE AND KENTUCKY
After the capture of Corinth, Halleck remained inactive, while the
confederates recruited their armies and prepared another movement.
They placed Bragg, with 35,000 men, in Chattanooga,
the key of southeastern Tennessee, and Buell was ordered
to operate against him. This union general collected his Louisville,
force at Murfreesboro, 35 miles southeast of Nashville,
protecting the latter place from Bragg. Before he could move farther
Bragg left Chattanooga, August 28, and dividing his army turned
Buell's left and marched into Kentucky. Lexington was seized, and
Louisville and Cincinnati were in a paroxysm of terror lest they should
be taken before succor arrived. Buell meantime gave up all thought
of Chattanooga, and hurried back to Louisville. Bragg was ahead of
him, and probably could have taken the city, but he became dis-
couraged when the Kentuckians did not join him, as he expected, and
allowed his opponent to reach the goal. Buell thus recruited his
force to 58,000 and turned backward to face his foe.
Seven days later, October 8, the two armies fought at
Perryville, 65 miles southeast of Louisville. Neither side
was entirely concentrated, but after fighting until dark Bragg with-
drew his force and reached Chattanooga safely. At Perryville he lost
2M
530 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
3400 men, and his opponent 4200. Buell was ordered to follow Bragg
and hold east Tennessee, but he thought he could not support his
men so far from his base and took position at Nashville. For doing
so he was removed from command and Rosecrans took his place.
The new general was ordered "to take and hold east Tennessee,"
but like Buell he refused to attempt it. He remained in Nashville
for weeks, -and Bragg quietly came back to Murfrees-
Battieof boro, where he intrenched. Finally, on December 26,
River or I862, Rosecrans moved on his opponent, and on the 3ist
Murfrees- a great battle was f ought at Stone's river, three miles
boro. from Murfreesboro, by which name the action is some-
times known. Each general proposed to attack the
other's right ; but Bragg moved at dawn, while the union attack was
ordered for 7 A.M. The confederate onset led by Hardee drove back
the union right, which was only saved by the immovable center under
Thomas. After a hard day's fight darkness closed the struggle.
Rosecrans seemed beaten, but would not retreat. January 2, Bragg
renewed the attack, but was beaten off and retired to Chattanooga.
The casualties were a union loss of 13,000 out of a total force of
43,000, and a confederate loss of 10,000 out of 38,000. The southerners
carried off 28 captured guns and claimed the victory ; but they had
failed to drive away Rosecrans and to rescue Tennessee from union
control. The net result of the war in the West for 1862 was that all
of Kentucky and western and central Tennessee as well as a large
part of the Mississippi river were wrenched from the confederacy.
VICKSBURG CAPTURED
After losing Memphis and New Orleans the confederates fortified
Vicksburg most carefully ; for it was the one strong position left them
on the river. If it were taken, the trans-Mississippi region
ofVkksbS would be cut off, the importation of light supplies through
"' Mexico would be made difficult, and a fertile source of
food for the armies would be lost. For the same reasons that the
South wished to hold it the North wished to take it.
In the summer of 1862 Halleck was called to Washington to aid
the president in the chief command of the army, and Grant was
left in command of the great army at Corinth. For weeks he remained
inactive, and the confederates, taking heart, tried to retake Corinth,
but were easily beaten off. For this delay he was bitterly criticized
by the press. His incaution at Shiloh was recalled, and rumor ran
that all his dilatoriness was due to the intemperate use of liquor.
But Lincoln stood faithfully by Grant.
This confidence was justified by a double expedition against Vicks-
burg, which got under way late in 1862. Sherman with 30,000 men
and a fleet of gunboats was sent down the river from Memphis,
GRANT OUTPLAYS PEMBERTON 531
while Grant, with the same number, started forward along the rail-
road for Jackson, Mississippi, whence he would approach Vicksburg
from the east. The advance of the land column was soon
checked when the confederates cut its communications at First
Holly Springs. Sherman's force reached Vicksburg and
attempted to land on the high ground north of the town. burg.
Here the Yazoo bottoms must be crossed in the face of a
destructive fire, and Sherman withdrew after satisfying himself that
Vicksburg could not be taken from the north.
Then Grant determined to land south of it and approach by the
high ground between the river and Jackson. His first idea was to
cut a canal through a bend of the river on the west bank
in order to take his supply ships past the confederate edition *
batteries. After weeks of digging, a March freshet de-
stroyed the canal, and Grant determined to run the batteries. It
seemed a hazardous thing, but was made by the supply boats in the
night and with slight loss. The army marched down the west bank
and was set across the river by the boats several miles below Vicks-
burg, and April 30, 1863, Grand Gulf was captured. The confederates
had not supposed a federal army would begin its operations in this
quarter, and the place was weakly defended.
Two hundred miles south of Vicksburg was Port Gibson, above
which the union gunboats could not go. Banks had been ordered
to take the place and open the way for a fleet supporting
Grant's army; but his advance was delayed and Grant
learned that he could expect no aid from the southward strategy,
at the same time that he heard that confederate troops
were concentrating on Jackson, Mississippi. His position was un-
comfortable. If Pemberton's 40,000 men in Vicksburg were joined
by the 15,000 J. E. Johnston was leading up by way of Jackson, the
43,000 men at Grand Gulf would fare badly. In the face of this
difficulty, Grant's action was admirable. Abandoning his base, he
quickly seized Jackson before Johnston could reach it, thus placing
all his force between the divided enemy. Pemberton was a cautious
general, and remained a few days in his stronghold, although ordered
out by Johnston. Then he changed his mind, and moved out with
about 30,000 men. Johnston had turned northward, hoping to get
into Vicksburg. Pemberton should have gone in the same direction
to meet him, but with a strange fatality he turned southward to cut
Grant's communications with Grand Gulf. He soon learned that the
union commander had abandoned his base and was living on the coun-
try. Then he tried to get back to the North, but Grant was in between.
Johnston realized that he could not unite with Pemberton,
and was forced to leave the latter to his fate. Then
Pemberton
Besieged.
Pemberton stood still for battle, first at Champion Hill
and then at the crossing of the Big Black river. In each action he
532
THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
Vicksburg
Taken.
was defeated, and May 18 he retired within his intrenchments at
Vicksburg. Grant followed and established his lines of siege from the
high banks of the Yazoo
to the Mississippi below
Vicksburg. He thus
came again into commu-
nication with the union
fleet, and supplies were
now landed and reen-
forcements were sent
from the North, so that
he soon had 75,000 men,
enough to finish Pember-
ton and beat off any
army which could be sent
to raise the siege.
The confederates re-
turned to Vicksburg
much dis-
couraged, but
they repelled
firmly two assaults on
their position. Then the
problem became one of
starving out the defend-
ers. While the siege cannon and mortars played continually, and
the sappers and miners brought Grant's lines ever nearer to
those of the confederates, the work of King Hunger went on. The
confederate authorities needed every available man to hold back
Rosecrans at Chattanooga, and reluctantly left Vicksburg to its fate.
In June the rations began to fail. On the 28th the soldiers were on
the point of widespread desertion and themselves suggested surren-
der. July 3 Pemberton asked for an interview with Grant, and next
morning the articles of surrender were signed. The confederates
were liberated on parole, 29,491 in all. They gave up 170 cannon and
50,000 small arms. This event, coming the day after the
battle of Gettysburg, made the national holiday a day of
rejoicing. It was followed by the fall of Port Hudson, and
union gunboats now held the entire course of the great
river. These operations placed Grant beyond the cavil of his critics,
and the nation generally recognized in him its greatest general.
THE CAMPAIGN FOR CHATTANOOGA
While Grant moved against Vicksburg, Rosecrans with an army^of
70,000 remained in Nashville, his eye on Bragg, who was charged with
ROSECRANS AGAINST BRAGG 533
the defense of Chattanooga. Unwilling to begin one important cam-
paign while another was in progress, he remained inactive until
Grant's success was assured. Meanwhile, Bragg advanced
to Shelbyville. But late in June Rosecrans took the field, £dvance of
j a i • i i r j i • v i_ • A **« Rosecrans.
and flanking cleverly forced him back into Chattanooga
without a battle. The place was very strong. It lies on the east
bank of the Tennessee, a bold stream, and is surrounded by moun-
tain ridges. To the south the country is quite rough. It is more
practicable to the north, and Bragg thought his opponent would
approach from that direction. The idea seemed supported by the
fact that Burnside had just moved with a strong column from Ken-
tucky into East Tennessee, and was at Knoxville in a position to move
southward in cooperation with the expected flanking movement
across the river. As Burnside did not move at once, Bragg concluded
an attack was not imminent. He thus allowed himself to be surprised
in another quarter.
Rosecrans determined to approach by the south. It was a hazard-
ous movement, but it was unexpected by Bragg, and it threatened
the communications with Atlanta. The union commander
did not know the country beyond the river, and was
floundering about for more than a week in the discon-
nected valleys, his right and left wings sometimes nearly three days
march from his center. Had Bragg been alert, he must now have
beaten his opponent in detail. But he dallied too long, and when on
September 18 he offered battle at Chickamauga Creek, twelve miles
south of Chattanooga, Rosecrans was concentrated before him. It
was a period of inactivity in the Virginia campaigning, both sides
resting after Gettysburg ; and Longstreet had been sent to aid Bragg,
who was also reenforced by Buckner's army, which Burnside had driven
southward from Kentucky. The confederates were thus in superior
numbers, having about 66,000 to their opponents' 58,000. In mak-
ing the detour to reach their opponents they had so moved that Rose-
crans was between them and Chattanooga.
Behind the union position was Rossville Gap, penetrated by the
road into Chattanooga. Bragg wished to seize this pass and isolate
his opponents. Withholding his own left, he struck hard
against the federal left, where Thomas commanded.
This brave commander stood firm, but the rest of the line
was weakened to send him reinforcements. At noon,
September 20, by mistake, a division was moved from the union center.
Longstreet, just opposite and waiting the word to charge, saw the
movement and sent eight brigades through the breach. They crushed
the union center, threw the left into confusion, and threatened Thomas
on the right. Both parts of the line retreated in great disorder.
Rosecrans tried in vain to rally his men, but could only follow them
through Rossville Gap into Chattanooga. He thought the day lost,
534 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
and sent orders to Thomas to protect the rear as well as he could.
But Thomas was not beaten. Surrounded on three sides, he repelled
charge after charge until night came, and then withdrew to the Gap,
where he took a strong position and held Bragg in check until ordered
to join the rest of the army in Chattanooga. This important engage-
ment was fought on September 19 and 20. It resulted in the loss of
19,500 killed, wounded, and captured on the confederate side, and
16,000 on the union side. Thomas's heroic fight saved the union
army from a complete rout and won for him the title of "The Rock
of Chickamauga."
After the battle of the 2oth the federal forces kept within Chat-
tanooga, Bragg following and fortifying himself on Missionary Ridge
and Lookout Mountain, east and south of the town. As
Lookout Mountain commanded the railroad, Rosecrans
could not bring his supplies by railroad farther than Bridge-
port, whence they must -be carried by wagons over wretched roads
around the great bend of the river, a distance of sixty miles. A
month later the army faced starvation or retreat. Lincoln was
alarmed and took vigorous steps. Sixteen thousand men under
Hooker were sent from Virginia, and Sherman with many more was
ordered up from Vicksburg. Thomas was placed in command of the
army , succeeding Rosecrans, whom the situation seemed to demoralize ;
and Grant was put in command of all the West but New Orleans, and
ordered to Chattanooga. October 23 he arrived and
Grant ( immediately took steps to open the railroad between
Bridgeport and the army. Throwing Hooker across the
river, the road from Bridgeport was seized in a safe place four miles
from Chattanooga. A new road was then constructed by Brown's
Ferry, which was operated without molestation, and the danger of
starvation was averted.
The next task was to drive Bragg away from the height above the
town, and Grant decided to make the attempt as soon as Sherman
arrived. The confederate line extended from the northern end of
Missionary Ridge along the crest to Rossville Gap, thence across the
valley of Chattanooga river to Lookout Mountain. Bragg thought
it very strong, and not anticipating an early attack weakened it by
withdrawing Longs treet from its center to strike Burnside at Knox-
ville. He thought Longstreet would return before his services were
needed at Chattanooga. He underestimated the energy of Grant,
and Longstreet was far away when -on November 24, Sherman
having arrived, the battle began.
Grant's plan was to turn the confederate right on the extremity
of Missionary Ridge, and for this purpose he selected Sherman.
Lookout While this movement was being made he proposed to
Mountain, keep the enemy in position with a strong feint by Thomas
in the center and Hooker on the union right, November 24, Sherman
EAST TENNESSEE RECOVERED 535
crossed the Tennessee in the early dawn, and drove the confederates
some distance along the top of the ridge they defended. At the same
time Thomas approached nearer to the base of the Ridge at the
center, and Hooker, starting to skirt Lookout Mountain, changed his
course, carried its steep slope, and finally placed the union flag on the
top of the tall peak which adorns its crest. This spectacular achieve-
ment, though not very difficult, greatly heartened the soldiers. On
the morning of the 2$th the confederates were still in strong position
on Missionary Ridge, and Sherman took up again the work of clearing
it by hard fightng. To aid him, Grant directed Thomas to advance
and take the works on the lower slopes. The order was executed,
but the soldiers found themselves exposed to a hot fire from the crest
of the Ridge. Without orders, and even against orders, they started
for the top, 400 feet above them. Grant, watching the battle, ex-
claimed, "By whose orders is this?" "By their own, I fancy,"
replied Thomas at his elbow. But the line went steadily forward.
At the crest was a brief struggle and then victory. Thirty guns were
taken, and Bragg hastily withdrew to Ringgold. The confederate
loss in killed, wounded, and captured was 6500, and that of the
federals, 5500. Hooker's engagement high up on Lookout was called
"the Battle above the Clouds."
Meanwhile, Longstreet had begun operations against Burnside at
Knoxville. To his surprise he found the inhabitants loyal to the
union. He made no headway, and after the battle of Chattanooga
returned to Virginia. Thus all Tennessee was safely restored to the
union, and a victorious army held the key to Atlanta and the Georgia
uplands.
THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST ATLANTA
After Chattanooga, both armies were exhausted and went into
winter quarters, the confederates at Dalton, Georgia, and the federals
in the city they had taken. Bragg was removed from
command. He had been severely criticized in the South,
and only Jefferson Davis's warm friendship had kept
him so long in a position he clearly was not able to fill.
His successor, Joseph E. Johnston, was able and vigilant in defense,
but he was curt to his superiors, and early in the war aroused the ill-
will of Davis. Grant once said he feared Johnston more than any
other general he faced. The confederate general began his campaign
of 1864 with 53,000 men, but was soon reenforced until he had 75,000.
The hope of the southwest was in the defense of Atlanta.
February 29, 1864, congress revived the rank of lieutenant
general, and the position was given to Grant, who thus became com-
mander under Lincoln of all the union troops in the field. He im-
mediately assumed the direction of operations in Virginia. The
force in Chattanooga, 99,000 strong, thus went to Sherman. Under
536 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
him served Thomas, commanding Rosecrans's old army, McPherson
with the troops which Sherman had brought from Vicksburg, and
Schofield with the forces which formerly operated at
Knoxville. The material in each army was excellent.
Political appointees had been weeded out, tried officers
of all ranks had come into responsible position, and the
soldiers, seasoned by two years of hard fighting, were veterans of the best
quality. The hilly country over which they must operate abounded
in good defensive positions, which Johnston knew how to utilize.
Its Task ^e critical feature was the railroad from Chattanooga
to Atlanta — serving as a means of communication for
each army. As Johnston fell back he destroyed it, but Sherman had
efficient engineers who repaired bridges and tracks so rapidly that the
confederate rear guard usually could hear the whistle of the locomotive
which accompanied the federal advance.
It was Sherman's habit to take the initiative, and early in May
he appeared before Dalton. Finding the confederates strongly placed,
he moved around their left and threatened so much the
SmkiT by railroad at Resaca that they hastily fell back to that posi-
Movements. tion, while, he gained twelve of the 120 miles between
Dalton and Atlanta. Again Johnston offered battle in
strong intrenchments, but Sherman was too wise to accept it. He
waited a few days, and once more flanked by the left, only to be again
confronted by Johnston in a strong position. This kind of campaign
continued until, at the end of June, Johnston was strongly fortified at
Kenesaw Mountain, 25 miles from Atlanta. At this point Sherman
abandoned caution and determined to accept battle. Selecting what
he thought the weakest point in Johnston's line he delivered a power-
ful assault with the hope of breaking through. But the
^fountain confederates held firm, and the attack was repelled with
a loss of 3000 federals and only 800 confederates. Thomas,
whose steadiness frequently tempered the impetuosity of Sherman,
was asked if he thought the assault should be repeated. He replied
that "one or two more such assaults would use up this army" ; and
he added that he did not favor "butting against breastworks twelve
feet thick and strongly abatised." His advice was taken, another
flank movement was made, and Sherman on July 9 reached the north
bank of the Chattahoochee, his opponent retiring in good
order to the south bank. At this place the union troops
Chatt-a were w*tllin s*x miles of Atlanta. During this campaign
hoochee. °f two months, although no great battle had been fought,
there had been continuous skirmishing and two or three
sharp affairs, with the result that the union loss was 16,800 and that
of the confederates 14,500.
In falling back on Atlanta, Johnston merely did as Lee was then
doing before Grant from the Wilderness to Cold Harbor. If he
NORTHERN GEORGIA RECOVERED
537
fought less, it was because Sherman advanced more cautiously than
Grant. But Southern opinion was not equally considerate of the
two leaders, and Johnston was severely criticized. July
17 he was replaced by General J. B. Hood, a man who command
would fight. Sherman crossed the Chattahoochee, the
same day, and rejoiced when he knew he had a new opponent. He
believed there would be fighting, and thought his numerical superiority
would give him the victory. Within eleven days Hood fought and
lost three battles, — Peach Tree Creek, July 20; Atlanta, July 22;
and Ezra Church, July 28. His total loss was 10,841 and Sherman's
was 9719. But for all this, Atlanta was not taken. Then Sherman
threw his columns out to the
west and south, enveloping the
city and threatening its com-
munications with the South
and East. This movement re-
quired a month, during which
the North began to despair of
his success. It was, said the
doubtful ones, but a repetition
of Grant's costly campaign, and
after it a siege, the result of
which no one could foretell.
But Hood did not allow him-
self to be besieged.
September 2 he Atlanta
evacuated Atlanta,
and next day it was J~
occupied by the
union forces. The news occa-
sioned great joy in the North,
for it was the first decided
success of a year of hard fight-
ing and heavy sacrifice. By
the very exultation of his
friends, Sherman could see how necessary it was that he should retain
what he had captured.
But his situation was not altogether safe : he was in the midst of a
hostile country, and his line of communication was a single railroad
held by strong garrisons, but liable to be cut by a large
and efficient column. Hood realized this situation and
tried to utilize it. He first moved westward and fell on
Allatoona, a railroad station 45 miles north of Atlanta.
It was firmly held, and the attack was beaten off. Had it
succeeded, Sherman must have recovered Allatoona or suffered serious
consequences. Then Hood made a detour still farther westward,
Hood
Threatens
Sherman's
Base.
538 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
going as far as Decatur, Alabama, on the Tennessee river. The place
was no miles south of Nashville, with which it was connected by rail.
Here he halted, hoping that the union leader would become fright-
ened and hasten back to Nashville.
But Sherman was not alarmed. Thomas was sent to Nashville
with the veterans who had served under Buell and Rosecrans, and
The Task ^enforcements were hurried to him from various quarters
of Thomas. until ^e ^ad nearly 60,000 men, quite enough to beat off
the attack of Hood, who had only 54,000. As long as
Hood was near the Chattanooga railroad, Sherman followed him;
but when the confederate commander's plan was revealed by his
crossing of the Tennessee, October 20, Sherman ceased to follow and
concentrated at Atlanta a well-seasoned army of 60,000 men. He
had for weeks been asking his superiors for permission to strike for
the seacoast, and Grant now reluctantly consented. Nothing could
show better the exhaustion of the South than the possibility that its
°PP°nents could divide their western army into two
columns, each of which was larger than the total force
the confederacy could muster in that region. Sherman
had before him no opposition worthy of the name, and he felt confident
that Thomas could deal with any force Hood could gather.
Let us first follow the movements of Hood. He was a good fighter,
but he had lost Atlanta, and his soldiers, regretting the removal of
Johnston, were not in good spirits. Delayed for three
weeks in southern Tennessee to collect supplies he could
November not move until November 21, which gave his opponents
3o. time to prepare for him. Across his path was Schofield
with 29,000 men, instructed to retard his advance and
fall back. The confederate commander should have surrounded this
force, but, although he sought it most vigorously, he lost his oppor-
tunity through the carelessness of a subordinate. Schofield was hard
pressed when he arrived, November 30, at Franklin, on the Harpeth
river, to find the bridge partly wrecked and his trains in great danger.
He intrenched hastily, and while the bridge was being repaired Hood
arrived and assaulted with great ardor. Each side fought most
desperately from four o'clock in the afternoon until dark, but the
union line held firm, and by morning Schofield was across the river
and proceeded unmolested to Nashville, 20 miles away. He had lost
2326 men, while his opponents, who fought recklessly and without
cover of breastworks, lost 6000. Hood followed more leisurely, and
took position on the hills south of the city, his army reduced by fight-
ing and marching to 23,207. It was the last hope of the confederacy
in Tennessee, and its chances seemed slender in the presence of the
union force of more than 50,000.
Thomas was deliberate by nature and would not fight until ready.
As he remained inactive day after day the country, and even Lincoln
THE LAST OF HOOD'S ARMY 539
himself, became impatient, lest Hood should escape. But Grant, who
once said that if Thomas came to a furrow he would stop to intrench,
showed most concern. All his telegrams did not bring on
a battle, and December 9 he ordered Thomas to hand over
the command to Schofield, but on consideration the
order was suspended. At last Thomas was ready, and December 15
he moved on the enemy, driving him back about four miles by hard
righting. The battle was renewed on the i6th, the confederates stand-
ing at bay for a life and death struggle. All their valor was unavail-
ing. Surrounded and broken, they had no chance, and at last fled
southward in whatever formation they could maintain. December
27, when they crossed the Tennessee river, they numbered less than
15,000 infantrymen. Many had been killed, many others were cap-
tured, and some had gone home under the impression that the war
was over. Nine thousand of the survivors were later sent to North
Carolina under Joseph E. Johnston to oppose Sherman. But from
this time the task of the western army was accomplished. Mobile
and a few posts held out, but nowhere could the Northern arms be
resisted between the Ohio and the Gulf.
SHERMAN'S MARCH THROUGH GEORGIA AND THE CAROLINAS
November 15 Sherman began from Atlanta his celebrated march
to the sea, burning before he started the machine shops in Atlanta
and destroying the railroad to Chattanooga. The tele-
graph wires were cut, and for nearly a month his govern- JjJaJ^ to
ment only knew of his movements from the newspapers savannah,
of the confederacy. His army marched along parallel
roads covering a zone sixty miles wide. It had supplies for twenty-
five days and was ordered to "forage liberally." In describing his
purpose before he set out Sherman himself said he would "make
Georgia howl." In his report of his movements he said : "I estimate
the damage done to the state of Georgia and its military resources at
$100,000,000 at least $20,000,000 of which has inured to our advan-
tage and the remainder is simply waste and destruction." The misery
thus inflicted on the non-combatants was as great as it was unneces-
sary. December 10 he was before Savannah, having accomplished
his progress of 360 miles without serious opposition. Hardee, who
was holding the town with 15,000 men, would not allow himself to be
besieged and withdrew on December 20.
The military results of Sherman's bold step were very important.
It encouraged the North and discouraged the South, showing both
sides plainly that the war was near an end. It cut off Results
supplies from Richmond and reduced the area of the
confederacy to the Carolinas and a part of Virginia. But all these
results might have been secured without the wanton destruction that
540 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
was inflicted on the country. The people of Georgia and South
Carolina were to remain Americans, and good policy, as well as humane
warfare, demanded that they should not be so dealt with that the
national flag should be remembered as a symbol of calamity.
Sherman remained in Savannah from December 20 until February i,
and then started northward, his march impeded by storms and
wretched roads. No opposition could be made by Hardee,
Savannah to an<^ P^aSm£> was more severe than in Georgia. South
Columbia. Carolina's initiative in secession made her especially dis-
liked by the federal army, officers and privates, and there
was slight effort to restrain them. "The whole army," wrote Sher-
man to Halleck, "is burning with an insatiable desire to wreak ven-
geance upon South Carolina. I almost tremble at her fate but feel
that she deserves all that seems in store for her." He gave orders
against plundering private dwellings, but they were not well enforced.
Reaching Columbia, the capital, he found in the streets
Bumed ^ tne smouldering remains of cotton. The soldiers of the
advance guard obtained liquor, broke from the control of
their officers, and during the entire night the streets were a scene of
riot. Bands carrying torches marched through the streets firing the
houses. In the morning a town which had sheltered 8000 inhabitants
was in ruins. A heated controversy arose over the question, "Who
fired Columbia?" One side claimed the fire star ted from the cotton
fired by the retreating confederates, and it is possible some buildings
might have been thus destroyed ; for a strong wind sprang up in the
evening and fanned the smouldering cotton into flame. But it seems
undoubted that most of the damage was the result of the action of
the uncontrolled soldiery, many of whose officers appear to have been
little inclined to restrain them. It was the culmination of that bitter
feeling which the entire army had shown up to this point, and which
a more magnanimous commander would have restrained in the be-
ginning. To the people of the North the devastation of this army
was very pleasing. Even Phillips Brooks exclaimed: "Hurrah for
Columbia ! Isn't Sherman a gem ? "
The occupation of Columbia forced Hardee to evacuate Charleston.
He hastened to North Carolina in order to place his army before that
of the conqueror. March n, Sherman reached Fayette-
ville> wnere ne destroyed an arsenal, but spared the town.
Carolina. ^n ^act> ne made efforts to limit the pillaging in this state,
and the inhabitants, although sorely distressed by soldiers
and "bummers," fared better than those of South Carolina and Georgia.
By this time Joseph E. Johnston had been placed in command of the
confederate troops in the Carolinas. Gathering all the soldiers he
could he stood before Sherman on March 16 at Averasborough, thirty
miles north of Fayetteville. Beaten back, he made another stand
three days later at Bentonville, but the result was the same, although
TASK OF WESTERN ARMY COMPLETED 541
for a few hours it seemed that he might throw into confusion the
union left, which marched incautiously. Proceeding thence Sherman
came, March 23, to Goldsboro, 160 miles south of Rich-
mond, against which Grant was about to complete his Goldsboro
operations. Two days earlier Schofield had arrived at
Goldsboro with 20,000 men, coming by way of Wilmington, which
had been taken in January, and Newbern, which had been in union
hands since 1862. But Sherman was not needed before Richmond.
After a two weeks' halt at Goldsboro he learned that Lee was retreat-
ing toward the mountains and turned westward in order to intercept
him. Before him Johnston slowly withdrew to Raleigh and then to
Greensboro, where, as we shall see, he at last gave up the contest in April.
Thus ended in triumph the work of the Western army. Some of
its contests were drawn battles, but none resulted in retrograde
movements. From Forts Henry and Donelson to Shiloh and thence
to Corinth, in withstanding Bragg at Perry ville and Murfreesboro,
in the operations against Vicksburg, Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and
Atlanta, in all these important movements there was steady and hard-
won success. How well the confederates used their inferior resources
is shown in the long series of losses they inflicted on the victors. They
were exhausted, and collapsed utterly before the vast power that was
brought against them.
THE WAR BEYOND THE MISSISSIPPI
While Grant, Sherman, and their assistants made the grand three
years' movement through Kentucky, Tennessee, and Georgia to the
sea, severe campaigning occurred west of the Mississippi.
Texas saw but little fighting, attempts of the confederates
to secure New Mexico came to naught, and western Louisi- Arkansas,
ana was too much isolated by the fall of New Orleans in
May, 1862, to become a scene of serious opposition to the union cause.
But in Missouri and Arkansas the case was otherwise. When the
union men in the former of these two states flocked to Lyon's stand-
ard and enabled him to save St. Louis to the union, the secessionists
assembled under General Sterling Price, disputing all that Lyon did
and precipitating a state of civil war.
Both leaders showed resourcefulness, but Lyon had the initial
advantage. He moved rapidly, and at Booneville, on June 17, dis-
persed the confederate force. It soon reassembled in
larger numbers, and at Carthage beat off an attack by Confeder-
Sigel, one of Lyon's lieutenants. Price was now reenforced peuSed *~om
by troops from Arkansas, so that his army was 10,000 Missouri,
strong. His opponent had only 6000, but risked battle at
Wilson's Creek, August 10, 1861. The result was union defeat, Lyon
being killed. His army was forced back into northern Missouri, and
542 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
there came a pause while both sides recruited. Fremont, who now
commanded the union forces in Missouri, soon had 40,000 men, but as
he was about to attack he was removed, and Hunter, his successor,
gave up the plan of offensive movements. Soon Hunter was removed,
and Halleck, who succeeded him, sent forward a force under Curtis,
before whom Price retired into Arkansas. Van Dorn was now placed
in command on the confederate side and met Curtis in a decisive
battle at Pea Ridge, Arkansas, March 7 and 8, 1862. Although the
confederates brought 16,200 men against 10,500, they were beaten,
and withdrew from the field. The confederates in Tennessee were
now hard pressed and the force under Van Dorn was so weakened that
Arkansas was at the mercy of Curtis, who gradually extended his area
of authority until at the end of 1862 most of the state was in union
hands. Schofield superseded him in 1863, but although he had 50,000
men he could not complete the task assigned him.
The center of confederate power here was the Red River valley,
which the confederates held with 25,000 men under Kirby Smith and
"Dick" Taylor, his lieutenant. Along the river were
Rive?Ex- great stores of cotton which the federals wished to seize,
pedition. ^n I^^3 Banks at New Orleans was ordered to move on
this region, but he refused because of the low stage of water
in the river. Early next year he got under way, with a land force
of 27,000 men and a fleet of gunboats under Commodore Porter.
His objective was Shreveport, at which place he was to be met by
15,000 men from Arkansas. His progress was slow, the country being
very difficult. At Sabine Cross Roads, April 8, when in two days'
march of Shreveport, he was repulsed by Taylor and was glad to
escape with a loss of several of his gunboats. The net result of the
expedition was to deprive Sherman of a valuable body of troops for
the operations against Johnston between Chattanooga and Atlanta.
Kirby Smith continued to hold the country around Shreveport until
the end of the war. He surrendered at Baton Rouge, May 26, 1865,
his force being 17,686.
One other western campaign remains to be noticed. In September,
1864, General Price marched into Missouri from Arkansas with 15,000
men. The war had reached such a stage in the West
that large movements were not to be undertaken by the
Missouri confederates, but they had enough troops to made destruc-
1864. tive raids, like those of Forrest and Morgan on the east
bank of the Mississippi. Price's objective was St. Louis,
which he approached rapidly. Finding its defenses too strong to
carry he turned off to Jefferson City. By this time the union forces
in the state were concentrating rapidly. Price must fight them at
several places, and moved so swiftly and fought so vigorously that he
was not surrounded. But he failed to inflict serious injury on his
opponents and was glad to escape to Arkansas after four weeks of
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 543
campaigning. He carried with him most of the guerrillas, who had
infested the state up to that time, and thenceforth Missouri was free
from confederate troops.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The general history of the war is ably treated in Rhodes, History of the United
States, 7 vols. (1892-1907). See also : Schouler, History of the United States, 6 vols.
(1880-1897) ; Wilson, History of the American People, 5 vols. (1902) ; Hosmer, The
Appeal to Arms (1907) ; Ibid., Outcome of the Civil War (1907) ; Burgess, The Civil
War and the Constitution, 2 vols. (1901) ; Greeley, The American Conflict, 2 vols.
(1864) ; and Draper, History of the Civil War, 3 vols. (1871).
Of the many military histories, see : Dodge, Bird's-Eye View of the Civil War
(1897), very useful in connection with a larger work ; Ropes, Story of the Civil Wart
2 vols. (1894-1898), unfinished at the death of the author but continued by Liver-
more, two volumes of whose work are promised for 1913 ; Count of Paris, The Civil
War in America, 4 vols. (trans., 1875-1888) ; The Campaigns of the Civil War, 13
vols. (1881-1890), mostly by generals who participated, important but not impartial ;
Fletcher, The Civil War in America, 3 vols. (1865); Wood and Edmonds, The
Civil War in the United States (1895) ; and Henderson, The Science o/ War (1905),
by an excellent English authority, five chapters relate to our civil war. Fox,
Regimental Losses (1889), and Livermore, Numbers and Losses (1901), are also valu-
able. The Southern side is presented in : Evans, edr., Confederate History, 12
vols. (1899), a cooperative history by states; Pollard, The Lost Cause (1867) ; and
Wood, The Confederate Handbook (1900).
The leading biographies and memoirs on the Northern side are : Nicolay and
Hay, Abraham Lincoln, a History, 10 vols. (1890), a storehouse of information
but always commendatory of Lincoln; Cox, Military Reminiscences, 2 vols. (1900),
a good book ; Grant, Personal Memoirs, 2 vols. (1895) ; Badeau, Military History of
Grant, 3 vols. (1868-1881); W. T. Sherman, Memoirs, 2 vols. (1886); Sheridan,
Personal Memoirs, 2 vols. (1902) ; Schofield, Forty-six Years in the Army (1897) ;
Schurz, Reminiscences, 3 vols. (1907-1909) ; Woodward, Nathaniel Lyon (1862) ;
Coppee, George H. Thomas (1893) ; and Lew Wallace, An Autobiography, 2 vols.
(1906). All of these relate to men who served in the West. On the Southern side
see : Joseph E. Johnston, Narrative of Military Operations (1874) ; Johnston, Life of
Albert Sydney Johnston (1879) > Hood, Advance and Retreat (1880) ; Polk, Leonidas
Polk, 2 vols. (1893); Taylor, Destruction and Reconstruction (1879); Wheeler,
Wheeler and His Cavalry (1899) ; Lee, Memoirs of General Pendleton (1893) ; Wyeth,
N. B. Forrest (1899) ; and Roman, Pierre G. T. Beauregard, 2 vols. (1884). In this
connection one must mention Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, 4 vols. (1888),
reminiscences of participants, interesting and valuable.
The sources are embraced in several collections published by the national and
state governments. Of these the greatest is The War of the Rebellion, a Compilation
of the Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, 69 vols. in 1 28 books, with an atlas.
It contains the reports of officers in both armies with other matter relating to military
operations. A companion work is Official Records of the Union and Confederate
Navies, 22 vols. (1894-1908). An important source of information is the Reports
of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War, 8 vols. (passim) . Most of the states,
North and South, have published regimental histories and muster rolls. Moore,
Rebellion Record, 13 vols. (1861-1868), is a compilation of contemporary utterances,
an interesting mine of personal incidents, war poetry, speeches, etc. Appleton's
Annual Cyclopedia (beginning in 1861) is also important. See Photographic History
of the War, 10 vols. (1911), for photographs.
On army experiences, see : Boynton, Sherman's Historical Raid (1875) > McClure,
Lincoln and Men of War Time (1892); Hosmer, The Thinking Bayonet (1865);
Browne, Four Years in Secessia (1865), by a war correspondent; Boynton, Chat-
544 THE WESTERN CAMPAIGNS
tanooga and Chickamauga (1891) ; Nichols, The March to the Sea (1865) ; McCarthy,
Detailed Minutiae of a Soldier's Life (1882) ; Goss, Recollections of a Private (1890) ;
and Wilkeson, Recollections of a Private Soldier (1887). On the Southern side:
Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary, 2 vols. (1866) ; Gilmour, Four Years in the Saddle
(1866) ; Smedes, A Southern Planter (1899) ; Wilson, Life in the Confederacy (1885) J
Hague, A Blockaded Family (1888) ; and Headley, Confederate Operations in Canada
and New York (1906). The use of negroes as soldiers is described in Williams,
History of Negro Troops (1888).
For Independent Reading
Chestnut, Diary from Dixie (1905); Gay, Life in Dixie during the War (1892);
Hague, A Blockaded Family (1888) ; Smedes, A Southern Planter (1899) 5 Morse,
Life of Lincoln, 2 vols. (1893) ; Tarbell, Life of Lincoln, 2 vols. (ed. 1900) ; Trent,
Life of Lee (1899) ; and Dana, Life of Grant (1868). For those who have much
interest in military history the memoirs of Grant, Cox, and Joseph G. Johnston
will be interesting. Rhodes's History is probably the most interesting story of the
war.
CHAPTER XXVI
THE WAR IN THE EAST, 1862-1865
McCLELLAN's PENINSULAR CAMPAIGN
THE most striking feature of the story of the union armies in the
East is the efforts to find a successful general. From the beginning
of the war until March, 1864, six commanders were tried
and rejected. Then the task was confided to Grant, whose
successes at Vicksburg and Chattanooga indicated that
he was the long-sought leader. Under his direction the struggle was
conducted to its close. The confederates, however, were as fortunate
in this respect as the federals were unfortunate. Their first leader,
Joseph E. Johnston, was an excellent commander ; and when he was
incapacitated, his successor was Robert E. Lee, the equal of any Ameri-
can soldier.
The first of the union commanders was McDowell, who fought a
well-planned battle at Bull Run and lost it because of no fault of his
own. But failure damaged his prestige with the army,
and he was followed, July 27,^1861, by McClellan, fresh *
from victories in West Virginia (see page 526). McClellan was a
man of good address, and soon had the devotion of his soldiers. His
unusual ability as an organizer quickly improved the efficiency of the
army. But he displayed some unfortunate personal qualities. He
overestimated the strength of his opponents; he was sensitive of
interference by others ; he quarreled with General Winfield 'Scott,
until October 31, 1861, the commander of the army, and McClellan's
superior; and he openly criticized the war department for political
appointments. On the other hand, it must be remembered that
McClellan was a good general, and his irritation at the meddlesomeness
of the politicians was natural. In politics he was a democrat, and
the open hostility of Stanton, the secretary of war, was supposed to
arise from an unwillingness to enhance the popularity of one who
might in the future be a formidable presidential candidate. The
McClellan controversy is still a matter of dispute.
By the end of October, 138,000 men were under arms near Wash-
ington, and public opinion demanded an advance, but McClellan was
not ready. October 21, at Ball's Bluff, 2000 men, who had
been incautiously thrown across the Potomac, were sur-
rounded and half of them lost. One of the slain was
Colonel Baker, of California, an officer of much promise, whose death
2N 545
546 THE WAR IN THE EAST
was deeply regretted. The blow caused profound sorrow in the North,
but McClellan did nothing to retrieve it. The weather was fine
through November and most of December, but still he kept his camp.
Then he fell ill of typhoid fever and was prostrate until the middle of
January. Finally Lincoln, who was generally patient with McClellan,
issued an order for an advance by all the armies, East and West, on
February 22. The order was impracticable and was ignored.
But McClellan's plan was made. He proposed to take the army
to Fortress Monroe, and from that point to reach Richmond up the
t "Peninsula," between the James and York rivers. By
Plan ' ^s P^an ^e would have support from the navy and main-
tain his communications by water. To the objection
that he would thus leave Washington exposed, he replied that Washing-
ton was safe as long as his army kept the confederates busy near their
own capital. Lincoln did not wholly approve the plan, but consented
to it on condition that enough troops be left at Washington to secure
it from danger. After McClellan was well on his way, he learned
that McDowell with 40,000 men, on whom he had counted, was to be
retained on the Potomac. He complained bitterly, but Lincoln held
that the retention of McDowell was in keeping with his agreement.
Early in April McClellan had 100,000 men at Fortress Monroe
and began to advance cautiously. The confederates made a show
of opposition at York town, stretching a thin line across
His the Peninsula, at that place thirteen miles wide. It
^deVcwcka° coul(J have been carried easily> but McClellan thought it
hominy. required siege operations. He brought up his heavy guns,
constructed intrenchments, and after a month's delay was
ready to open fire when the enemy quietly left their position. At
Williamsburg they fought a rear-guard action in which they lost 1570
men to their opponents' 1866. But they still retreated, and were
closely followed. The fleet with the supply ships passing up the York
seized White House Landing, twenty miles from Richmond, and made
it a base of supplies for the army, which was thrown out to the Chicka-
hominy, ten miles from the city. This was the situation on May 16.
The federal advance into the interior made Norfolk unsafe for the
confederates, and they evacuated it, destroying the ram Virginia
(Merrimac), which they could not remove. This left the
Opened^ * federal fleet without opposition in these waters, and it
ascended the James to Drury's Bluff, six miles from Rich-
mond. Here it encountered strong batteries, beyond which it did not
go. A cooperating land force could have taken this position, but
McClellan was on the York, which allowed him to keep his army
between the confederates and Washington.
Meanwhile, the confederates clung to Richmond, and Lincoln, losing
his fears for Washington's safety, ordered McDowell to Fredericksburg,
and thence to the aid of McClellan. Six days later, May 24, the order
JACKSON IN THE SHENANDOAH VALLEY 547
was reversed on account of unexpected developments in the Shenan-
doah valley. This region furnishes a safe approach to Harper's Ferry,
sixty miles from the capital and seventy-five from Balti-
more. Stonewall Jackson was in its lower part with 1 7 ,000 Jackson's
men, watched by Banks with 19,000 near Strasburg, and Jn1^8""1
Fremont, with 15,000 in the mountains to the westward valley.
— all within easy distance. Besides these, there were
7000 men at Harper's Ferry. Milroy, under Fremont, stood with
3500 men at McDowell, 25 miles west of Staunton, so that if Jackson
advanced on Banks, Milroy might close in on his rear.
The approach of McClellan to Richmond made it advisable for
Jackson to create a diversion, so as to draw off McDowell, and he began
a brilliant campaign which well illustrates what an inferior force, when
well handled, may do in conflict with a divided opposition. First he
fell unexpectedly on Milroy and defeated him, and pursuing him
northward threw Fremont into such terror that he was not a factor
in the situation for several days. Then returning to the valley, he
moved swiftly on Banks at Strasburg, whose force had just been
weakened by sending 10,000 men under Shields to help McDowell
in his movement to the aid of McClellan. Jackson was nearly on
Banks before his approach was known. The latter was too weak to
fight, and hastened northward, the confederates in hot pursuit. At
Winchester, May 25, they overtook Banks, charged him at dawn,
and sent his force beaten and demoralized toward the Potomac,
which the fugitives crossed the next day, Jackson stopping at Harper's
Ferry. This unexpected movement created consternation in Wash-
ington, which, the authorities thought, was Jackson's objective. It
was on this account that McDowell was ordered to turn
away from Fredericksburg. Lincoln hoped to throw him
into the valley south of Jackson's position, to bring Fre- jackson.
mont from the west into the same position, and thus sur-
round and capture Jackson. Orders to this effect were given ; but
Jackson knew his danger and began a retreat as rapid as his advance.
He barely slipped into Strasburg before Shields and Fremont reached
them from opposite directions, and, when they tried to follow him
down the valley, hurled them back in two sharp battles. In a month's
campaign he had captured many prisoners and vast supply trains,
which he safely sent off from Port Republic, and he had drawn
McDowell so far westward that he was worth nothing to McClellan,
who must fight Johnston unaided.
But McClellan was not in danger. He had nearly 120,000 men,
and his pickets were in sight of Richmond, within which Johnston
could muster but 63,000. The union army was in five corps, two
of which under Keyes and Heintzelman were south of the Chicka-
hominy, then swollen by rains, and the others under Porter, Sumner,
and Franklin were north of it to protect the railroad to White
548 THE WAR IN THE EAST
House Landing and to touch hands with McDowell, who was expected
up to May 24. Johnston saw his opportunity and fell on the two
isolated corps of Keyes and Heintzelman on May 31 at
The Ba';tie Seven Pines, or Fair Oaks. He fought hard and drove
pineesvei back his opponents, but they were not crushed, and late
May 31. in the day Sumner crossed the river and saved the battle
ere dark. Next day other troops were thrown over, and the
united army drove back the confederates to their position in the
beginning of the action. At sunset on the 3ist, Johnston was severely
wounded, and June i Robert E. Lee succeeded him. Two
Command roads ran from this region into the city, and across them
he began to throw up breastworks, behind which his army
was placed. Rain for 'two weeks made the ground impossible for
artillery, and Lee was thus able to finish his defenses before they
could be assailed.
McClellan has been criticized for not assaulting, but he had an-
other plan of battle. He was strong in artillery and proposed to plant
it advantageously and force the confederate lines by ap-
A^oaches Proacnmg m siege fashion, — a slow but sure method for a
pfanned. superior force. Davis and Lee both admitted that it
would be successful. Not daring to await such an attack,
they planned a movement around the federal right. Jackson, still
in the Shenandoah valley, was to elude McDowell, and march to the
north of McClellan's lines, while Lee, coming out of his
intrenchments, would join Jackson at the right moment,
Attack. cut McClellan's communications, and surround and capture
him, or send him in confusion back to the York river. The
danger in this was that Jackson's cooperation might be ill-timed or
that McClellan might penetrate Lee's lines when they were weakened
and occupy Richmond. Lee knew both his lieutenant and his foe.
He did not believe the former would fail him, nor that the latter had
enough enterprise to strike for Richmond at the critical moment. In
both conclusions his judgment proved good.
Jackson cleverly got out of the valley and, marching with that
rapidity which won for his men the name of "foot cavalry," was
north of Richmond on June 26. Here Porter's corps,
a^out 25>oo° strong, protected the federal right at Me-
chanicsville, the only federal troops north of the Chicka-
hominy. At this moment Lee ordered out A. P. Hill's,
Longstreet's, and D. H. Hill's divisions to unite with Jackson and
crush Porter. The former moved at the appointed hour and fought
a vigorous battle at Mechanics ville, June 26 ; but Jackson
Gaines's was half a day late and jjill's attack was beaten back.
June 27. In the night the four confederate lieutenants united their
forces and faced Porter with 55,000 men. The latter
was badly placed, and by the orders of his superior fell back to Gaines's
McCLELLAN'S ESCAPE 549
Mill, where he received and checked the first confederate charge
about noon of the 27th. All through the afternoon he fought desper-
ately, but at sunset his lines were broken by a general assault and his
defeated corps, numbering with reinforcements 3 1 ,000, was forced off
the field and sought safety south of the river. During this day
McClellan had over 60,000 men south of the river, between Lee and
Richmond, in which were only 25,000 defenders. He might well
have overcome this force and taken the city, but his
overcautious mind thought at least 100,000 confederates McCiellan's
were in Richmond, and he thought this was proved by opportunity
the fact that Lee did not hesitate to leave the place for
operations against Porter.
The capture of the north bank of the Chickahominy placed Lee
across the communications of the federal army. He believed the
federals would either fight their way back or retreat down
the peninsula to Fortress Monroe. On the morning of
the 28th clouds of dust to the east seemed to show they
had taken the latter course, and he made arrangements to follow.
It was not until next morning that he learned he was mistaken.
McClellan had determined to shift his base to the James and was
rapidly executing that movement, much benefited by the twenty-
four hours' start Lee unwittingly gave him. He was followed with
haste on the 29th, but held his own in a hard fight at
Savage's Station, and again on the 3oth in a still harder Savage's
encounter at Frayser's Farm, or Glendale. July i he was p^tig^r>sand
on the bank of the James, marching southeastward to Farm * June
Harrison's Landing, where the anchorage was good. 29 and 30.
He took a strong position at Malvern Hill, overlooking the
river, and for a moment the confederates hesitated to attack. But
Lee believed he had defeated most of the federal army at Gaines's
Mill, and thought his opponents so demoralized that they
could not make a successful resistance. He ordered the HillVj™y x
assault, and his forces were received with well-directed
artillery and infantry fire and defeated with heavy loss. It is conceded
that the battle of Malvern Hill was an error on the part of the con-
federate commander, due to his underestimation of the strength and
condition of the federals.
The Seven Days' Battles, June 26 to July i, comprised five en-
gagements in which McClellan lost 15,849 and Lee 20,135. The
result was a union defeat in the sense that Richmond was R j
not taken. But McClellan at Harrison's Landing was
only twenty miles from Richmond, and had a safe base of operations.
His army, though exhausted and dispirited, was not demoralized, and
might have taken the offensive again after a short period of rest.
He himself had no thought of giving up and called for reinforcements.
But the confidence of the government in the general was undermined,
550 THE WAR IN THE EAST
reinforcements were not sent, and after ten days of hesitation it was
determined to recall him to Washington and move his army to north-
ern Virginia. The controversy that arose over his treatment is his-
toric. Personally he was arrogant, and his letters to Lincoln were
full of bitter reproaches. The president's replies are
McClellan alwavs m the kindest terms, and it cannot be doubted
Controversy. tnat ne supported his unpopular general as long as the
country at large would have it. But spite of his faults,
McClellan was a safe campaigner of the deliberate kind, and if he had
been given his way, he would probably have hung on at Richmond
until he stormed it into surrender. It is in his favor that the city
finally fell before a nine months' siege in which Grant approached
from practically the same quarter that McClellan selected in the
beginning of the war.
POPE AND SECOND BULL RUN
July n, ten days after Malvern Hill, Halleck was recalled from St.
Louis and made commander of all the union armies with headquarters
in Washington. For the success in the West his subordi-
and Po e nates were chiefly responsible, but this was not as clear
then as later. He became, in fact, military associate with
the president and the secretary of war, who, since January, 1862, was
the strong-willed Stanton. The armies of Fremont, Banks, and
McDowell were consolidated, in all 43,000 men, and Pope, victor at
Island No. 10, was placed in command. He was an aggressive general,
but incautious. He issued a proclamation to his new army contain-
ing these words, and others of similar import : "I have come to you
from the West, where we have always seen the backs of our enemies ;
from an army whose business it has been to seek the adversary and
to beat him when he was found. ... I presume that I have been
called here to pursue the same system." This overconfident spirit
offended the officers and privates, who were sensitive about their
recent defeats. In an unlucky moment he said, by common report,
that his headquarters would be in the saddle, a phrase which set his
soldiers laughing at his expense. Early in July he mobilized his
army in front of Washington and turned its face southward along the
line of railroad that ran to Manassas, arriving undisturbed at Cul-
peper. He was much under the influence of Stanton and other radical
politicians whose interference frequently created difficulties for Lin-
coln and the generals.
At Culpeper, Pope threatened Gordonsville, where the railroad
from the north crosses another from Staunton going eastward. To
protect it Lee sent forward Jackson with nearly 24,000 men, who
reached Gordonsville and turned northward, while Banks, followed
at an interval by Sigel with Fremont's old army, was hurrying
1 — — I
SCENE OK
OPERATIONS IN THE EAST
. Scale of Miles
JACKSON IN POPE'S REAR 551
southward. August 8, Jackson struck Banks, whose force was only
8000, at Cedar Mountain. The federal troops remembered the valley
campaign and fought desperately, but they were outnum-
bered two to one and were forced back on Sigel late in the Jackson
afternoon. Then Jackson halted for the arrival of Lee, Jfeekts
who, at last satisfied that McClellan's army was withdraw- c*|
ing from Harrison's Landing, was moving rapidly on Gor- Mountain,
donsville. McClellan's men were then marching overland
to Yorktown and Fortress Monroe to embark for Acquia Creek, on
the Potomac, whence they would undoubtedly be sent to strengthen
Pope ; but as this movement would require two weeks Lee hoped by a
quick concentration to crush Pope before reinforcements reached Cul-
peper. But Pope displayed unexpected caution. From a captured dis-
patch he learned Lee's plan and fell back behind the Rappahannock
and was 35 miles from Acquia Creek, where troops were already land-
ing. There was much confusion in high circles in Washington, but
Pope was ordered to hold the Rappahannock at every hazard, and
it was believed that a forward movement would follow a federal con-
centration.
All this came to naught through a brilliant movement, probably
conceived by Stonewall Jackson. It was, in brief, to send Jackson
with 25,000 men well around Pope's right to cut the rail-
road by which the union supplies came up. Pope, it
might be expected, would fall back and fight Jackson,
who must manage to beat him off for a short time, while
Lee, making a still wider detour to the west, would come up as Pope
fought, take position by Jackson's side, and complete the work of
federal demoralization. It was a hazardous measure, but Lee felt
he could risk something in the presence of a general so unwary as
Pope. The result showed that his confidence was well founded. In
fact, the plan worked better than was anticipated ; for Jackson was
able to elude his enemy until Lee was actually at hand.
The start was made August 25, and twenty-five miles were covered
that day in safety. Pope heard that a large body of troops was march-
ing on his right and should have occupied the passes in that
direction, but he thought the confederate army was moving Jack^on
into the Shenandoah valley by Fort Royal, and neglected pope'sRear.
to protect his rear. Eight miles north of the Rappahan-
nock a range of hills, the Bull Run mountains, runs away north-
ward, broken sixteen miles west of Manassas by Thoroughfare Gap.
Passing beyond these hills, which screened his movements, Jackson
halted before the Gap on the night of the 26th, and next morning
passed through it, moving rapidly eastward. In the late afternoon
he reached Bristoe Station, cut the telegraph lines, broke the rail-
road track, and sending a portion of his force to Manassas destroyed
a vast depot of federal supplies after appropriating all his troops
552 THE WAR IN THE EAST
could consume or earn/ with them. In this process he spent all of
the 2yth, throwing out detachments north and south to save
his main force from surprise.
About 8 o'clock on the 26th, Pope learned the confederates were in
his rear. He did not think they were divided, but thought they
could not have gone further than Warrenton and that the
Pope's demonstration at Bristoe was only a feint. He gave
rograde et orders, therefore, to concentrate at Warrenton, where he
Movement, expected to offer battle. But riding to Bristoe late in the
day he discovered that Jackson was resting at Manassas and
gave sharp orders for a concentration at that point. McDowell had
divined the true situation and occupied the approaches to Thorough-
fare Gap, by which Lee must come up. If he had held them, the
force at Manassas must have been isolated and badly handled. But
he obeyed orders, and on the 28th withdrew just as Longstreet, com-
manding the other half of Lee's army, approached it from the west.
He moved toward Manassas, where Pope arrived at noon of the same
day. To the surprise of Pope his prey had gone in the night. No
one knew just where, but it was said he went to the northeast. Pope
supposed the confederates were trying to reach Alexandria and
gave orders to move northward. Jackson's departure to the north-
east was only a feint. He soon doubled back toward Thoroughfare
Gap and took a strong position on the heights of Groveton,
two miles west of the old Bul1 Run battleneld- He con-
Battle cealed his force as well as he could through the night and
next forenoon, August 29, and awaited news from Long-
street. On the same morning the supporting column cleared the Gap,
and Jackson, hearing the good news, revealed his position and opened
fire on union columns moving along the roads toward the north.
Longstreet, hearing the guns, hurried his steps, and arriving at noon
found his friend warmly engaged, the union brigades coming up
rapidly and forming line of battle as they arrived. Longstreet placed
himself on Jackson's right, before which Porter's corps had taken
position. Pope was determined to fight a battle, and ordered Porter
to turn Jackson's right ; but Porter, finding masses of infantry before
him, refused to sacrifice his men, and reported the situation. Pope
paid no attention to this information, for he still thought Longstreet
beyond the Bull Run mountains. He therefore assaulted Jackson's
center, and renewed his orders to Porter to turn the confederate left.
Again Porter refused to attack, action for which he was cashiered and
removed from command, only to be completely exonerated by con-
gress after many years of discussion. At nightfall the confederates
were still in position, the union assaults in the center had been beaten
off, and Pope's army was dispirited.
But the general, who six weeks earlier had talked so confidently of
victory, could not make up his mind to fall back as he should have
POPE DEFEATED 553
done. He remained in his tracks, and on the morning of the 3oth re-
sumed the battle. Moving Porter from the left he sent him against
Lee's center. This gallant officer, 'stung by criticisms of
the previous day, now showed the greatest bravery ; but |^gdof
his best efforts were in vain. Then Lee took the offensive, Manassas.
charging the federals persistently, forcing them back to
the Henry House, on the battlefield of the preceding year — where
by a desperate stand the confederates were held at bay until the
demoralized federals had crossed Bull Run and blown up the famous
old bridge behind them. The army marched on toward Washington,
Lee sent Jackson in a pursuit which ended on September i, when the
pursuers were barely defeated at Chantilly, where gallant Phil
Kearny lost his life. In this campaign Pope lost 14,000 out of
80,000 men and Lee lost 9000 out of 54,000.
Thus ended Pope's campaign. In the flood of unpopularity which
came upon him the country forgot his good qualities. He was as
hard a fighter as Hood, who impetuously wore himself out
fighting Sherman and Thomas. But, like Hood, he was commander
arrayed against very able generals. He was deceived by
Jackson's remarkably rapid march and by Lee's audacious tactics. He
lost his self-control when he found himself ciit off from his base and
gave orders in utter distraction ; but when once the enemy's position
was revealed he turned and fought bravely. It is due him, also, to
say that he was much hampered by his superiors. Halleck assumed
to direct his movements, kept him in ignorance of the plans of cam-
paign being made in Washington, and left him ignorant of the move-
ments of reenforcement which had been promised. But the disaster
at second Bull Run destroyed Pope's influence over his army, and his
removal became a necessity.
THE CAMPAIGN OF ANTIETAM
Lee was not strong enough to besiege Washington, and foresaw that
to wait at Manassas would invite a federal countermove, before which
he must fall back with a loss of prestige. He concluded
to proceed at once into Maryland, hoping the people there ||^ad
would join his army in numbers. His plan was to march Maryland,
to Hagerstown, where he would force a battle with the
union army, and beating it to threaten Harrisburg and probably Bal-
timore. As it was just at this time that Kirby Smith and Bragg
were operating successfully in Kentucky (see page 529) it was hoped
that such an impression might be made on European opinion that
recognition of the confederacy would follow. September 4, less than
a week after Pope's crushing defeat, his advance under Jackson
crossed the Potomac twenty-five miles above Washington, and by
the yth the rest of his army was in Maryland. Reenforced by the
554 THE WAR IN THE EAST
troops he had left in Richmond he had hardly 60,000 men. Septem-
ber 6, Jackson reached Frederick, where the now repudiated Barbara-
Frietchie incident was said to have occurred. To his surprise the
farmers drove off their cattle and would not sell their
ita?6*'8 £ram- Then Lee decided to open a line of supplies
Captured. through the Shenandoah valley, at the entrance of which
was Harper's Ferry with a garrison of 12,500 men. To
remove this obstacle he sent Jackson on the loth, with orders to com-
plete his task and rejoin his commander as quickly as possible. To
divide his army thus in the presence of the enemy was ordinarily bad
generalship; but he knew his opponents were slow and he believed
no harmful results would follow. Jackson's march was swift, as
usual, and on the i4th he occupied the hills which encircle the place,
and the garrison, with many valuable stores, was surrendered with-
out a battle.
But let us return to the army of Pope, marching on September 5
hopelessly back to Washington. Near the city the vanguard was
met by McClellan with orders to take command. In a
McClellan moment the spirit of the soldiers changed, and shouts of
mandT Jov welcomed him as he rode past the regiments. Pope
was assigned to other duties in Washington. The same
day orders were given to enter Maryland and follow Lee, but it was
not until the loth that McClellan had reorganized the army, and the
1 2th before he reached Frederick, through which the confederates
had passed a few days earlier. Here he was handed, at 6 P.M. on the
i3th, an order from Lee to D. H. Hill, recently found by a private,
which revealed the plans of the confederate commander. It showed
him that his opponent's army was divided, and he decided to place
himself between its two parts. Twelve miles west of him were the
South mountains, with two gaps in them, beyond which the roads
connecting the two confederate forces were no more than eight miles
away. Had he marched in the night he might have
occupied these passes, but he waited until daylight, and
toPLe°e.° when he reached them found they were held by the con-
federates. By hard fighting the gaps were both carried
on the i4th, but the loss was severe. By this time Lee had learned
the fate of the lost order and was falling back from Hagerstown. He
stopped at Sharpsburg, threw up intrenchments in a strong position
with Antietam creek on his front, and waited Jackson, who on the
morning of the i5th received the surrender of Harper's Ferry and
immediately set out to rejoin Lee, fifteen miles away. From Lee's
position to the South mountains was only nine miles, and McClellan
easily covered them by noon of the i5th. If he had fought in the
afternoon he would have had half the confederate force at his mercy ;
but he chose to wait while his army recuperated. Next morning
Jackson's men were coming up rapidly, but the last divisions did not
INVASION OF MARYLAND 555
arrive until the following morning, the iyth. Yet McClellan was idle
on the 1 6th. Nothing could better show how little he was capable
of seizing upon a favorable situation.
There was skirmishing late on the i6th, but it was not until dawn
of the i yth that the battle was opened. Three corps, Hooker's,
Mansfield's, and Sumner's, had approached Lee's left on
the 1 6th, showing him where to expect attack. He Bat^e<>f
drew back his lines and strengthened the point threatened, se^emt^er
In the early morning Hooker came up most vigorously. I7> ^62.
As he struggled for the high ground in front of him, Mans-
field came up and joined in the battle. But the latter officer was
killed, Hooker was severely wounded, and soon afterwards their corps
fell back out of the deadly fire. Then Sumner advanced on the same
position unsupported. He received the concentrated fire of Lee's
left wing, and was so cut up that he had to withdraw with severe loss.
Thus by one o'clock the fighting on Lee's left ended in a repulse. It
was immediately renewed on his right, where Burnside's men pressed
against lines which had been weakened to meet the charge on the
left. They carried the battle before them and seemed about to seize
the high ground which commanded this part of the field when A. P.
Hill's division of Jackson's corps rushed up, completing an eighteen-
mile march from Harper's Ferry. Without orders from Lee they fell
on the advancing union line and drove it back with bloody effect to
its original position. Then night came, and the battle of Antietam
was over. Lee's army of 60,000 had repelled the attack with a loss
of 11,000 killed and wounded. McClellan with 87,000 lost 12,400.
Next morning each army was in position, but McClellan did not
renew the battle. Lee's advance into Maryland was checked, and
nothing was left but to recross the Potomac, which was
only two miles behind his position. This he did on the
1 9th without interference from his unaggressive adversary. Battle.
September 17 was the bloodiest single day in the war.
The union soldiers fought splendidly, and justified the confidence of
their commander. The nation received the news with joy; for al-
though the confederacy was not destroyed, the union army's prestige
was reestablished and the North was relieved from invasion. McClel-
lan's failure to impede the confederate retreat again brought his
serious failing into prominence, and for this he was removed, the
command going, November 5, to Burnside.
THE BATTLE OF FREDERICKSBURG
Burnside did not wish to lead the army, but the appointment came
as an order, and he obeyed it. The whole situation demanded a move
on Richmond. Indeed, it was for not moving that McClellan was dis-
placed. Two railroads ran from the Potomac southward j one from
556 THE WAR IN THE EAST
Washington by way of Manassas, through a rolling country in which
the rivers are narrow, the other from Acquia Creek through Fred-
ericksburg to Richmond, crossing rivers comparatively
Command ^ ^road- AlonS the former both McDowell in 1861 and Pope
in 1862 had operated. If the country was more prac-
ticable than that to the eastward, it gave a longer approach to Rich-
mond. Burnside, weighing all advantages and disadvantages, con-
cluded to move by Acquia Creek and Fredericksburg, and
^Advance Lincoln, after some hesitation, accepted the plan. ' Lee
was then at Culpeper with Longstreet, and Jackson was
far away in the valley. Burnside ordered pontoons, and eluding Lee
moved quickly to the Rappahannock opposite Fredericksburg, hoping
to cross the river and hold the heights south of it before Lee could
arrive. But his pontoons were not ready promptly, and when they
arrived Longstreet held the southern heights and Jackson was coming
up rapidly. Burnside had 113,000 and Lee, with Jackson at hand,
had 78,000 men.
The ground adjoining the river on the south is a plain from a mile
to a mile and a half wide, covered by Burnside's guns on the north
bank. Behind it rise hills, on the crest of which Lee took
Battle of position. His left was held by Longstreet and his right
bur^De1*8" ^Y Jackson, who arrived there on the i2th and was not
cember 13, well intrenched on the day of the battle. Burnside
1862. divided his force into three grand divisions under Hooker,
Franklin, and Sumner. The first remained in reserve on
the north bank, but the second and third he threw across the river
on the 1 2th, where they remained safely on the plain. Franklin con-
fronted Jackson, and Sumner, protected by the streets of Fredericks-
burg, was before Longstreet. Burnside by this time showed that the
problem on his mind overwhelmed him. He displayed little decision,
and his lieutenants were full of misgivings. Early on the i3th Frank-
lin received an order which might mean to carry the works before
him or to make a reconnaissance in force. The former was Burn-
side's intention, but Franklin in some doubt sent forward Meade's
division, and some time later supported it with Gibbons's
Union6 division. The former went forward with great courage,
Right! found a weak point, and penetrated Jackson's line, but
he was not well supported, and was driven back with
heavy loss by the confederate commander. With this, fighting
ceased on this wing.
In the town Sumner had been held in restraint, but
5?n.theL now came on to assault Longstreet. It was a murderous
Marye's* ' tas^ > ^or nere tn^ confederate position was exceedingly
Heights. strong. Its center was Marye's Heights, well defended
at the top by artillery and at the bottom by an infantry
line behind a stone wall. Across the plain by which it was reached was
LEE AGAINST HOOKER 557
an old canal, which would impede a charge, and the whole plain was
so well covered that a confederate engineer remarked that it would
be impossible for a chicken to live on it, once the confederate guns
opened fire. Sumner's brigades, however, were thrown six times
across this deadly spot, each time recoiling with enormous loss.
Hooker, who had come over the river, rode hastily back to Burnside,
on the north bank, to urge that the assault cease, but the general
would not relent until 8000 of his men lay on the fatal slopes. The
total loss in that day's fighting was 12,653 federals and 5377 con-
federates. December 15, under cover of night and a violent storm,
the union army withdrew to the north bank. Grief and
despair reigned in army and nation. Burnside himself
was crushed, some of his highest officers were at open feud
with him, and he asked for their dismissal or the acceptance of his
own resignation. January 26 he was removed, and the command
went to Hooker, chief of Burnside 's critics.
THE BATTLE OF CHANCELLORSVILLE
Hooker was a good fighter, and the soldiers liked him. His ap-
pointment to command them restored the broken spirits of the men,
and by April they were anxious to meet their foes. Re-
cruiting had brought the numbers up to 130,000, while
Lee in Fredericksburg had only 60,000. April 27, Hooker itiative,
broke up his camp opposite Lee, sending three corps thirty
miles up the river. Here they crossed and turning eastward on its
right bank approached Chancellorsville, nine miles from Fredericks-
burg. On the 3oth another corps crossed the river and joined the
other three, so that Hooker by clever marching was in good position
beyond the river with 40,000 men and on Lee's left flank. While
this was going on, Sedgwick with 20,000 men had crossed the Rappa-
hannock south of Lee's position and threatened his rear. May i,
Hooker moved a short distance toward the enemy, but when he
suddenly met them coming toward him, eager for battle, his confidence
forsook him, and he fell back to Chancellorsville against
the advice of his generals. Here he selected a position
with his back to the river, near a ford, and awaited at- offensive,
tack. Since he far outnumbered Lee, it would have been
better to have made the attack. Part of his line lay in the "Wilder-
ness," a region covered with small trees and chaparral
and difficult for marching troops. His officers and sol- Battle of
diers were disgusted that he so quickly relinquished a ^iC^°TS~
promising offensive and accepted a careful defensive. May 2 *' anY 4t
2, Lee was before him ready to attack, spite of his nu- 1863.
merical inferiority. Jackson is said to have suggested
the plan of battle which was adopted. While the confederate line
555 THE WAR IN THE EAST
made feint after feint along the union front, he made a detour of
fifteen miles, until at five o'clock in the afternoon he fell unexpec-
tedly on Hooker's extreme right, routing Howard's corps and badly
demoralizing the corps next to it. Then darkness closed down, and it
seemed that the coming of dawn would witness a renewed and suc-
cessful fight by the terrible Jackson. But his end was at hand. In
the twilight he rode past his own sentinels to reconnoiter in the en-
emy's rear. Half an hour later a group of horsemen galloped back
on the sentinels and received a volley, after which a voice
Jackson out °f t*16 dark called : "Boys, don't fire again : you have
hit General Jackson !" They carried him through lines
of his own awe-stricken men to a hospital, and May 10 he died. Had
he been at Gettysburg, as Lee truly said, the story of the battle would
have been different.
May 3 the battle was renewed, and by 10 o'clock the field belonged
to the confederates. Hooker, dazed by the effects of a cannon ball,
. which struck a column against which he leaned, drew back
Competed7 towarci tne river. Sedgwick now approached behind Lee,
after driving off Early with 9000 men, whom Lee left at
Fredericksburg. Lee believed Hooker was past active resistance, and
turned his back on him to crush Sedgwick. He found him on the
river's edge, five miles from the camp of his superior commander, and
pressed him so disastrously on the 4th that Sedgwick crossed to the
north bank during the night. Then Lee turned again on Hooker's
80,000, who stood not to fight, although they would have done it
with a better general, but withdrew to the north bank by the morn-
ing of the 6th. Through three days of fighting at Chancellorsville
the losses were 17,287 on the union side and 12,463 on the confederate
side. It was the last great confederate victory.
THE GETTYSBURG CAMPAIGN
Lee's motives in invading the North were three: i. He wished to
transfer the war to enemy's territory. 2. It was becoming evident
that Vicksburg would fall, and he wished to counteract its
Motives effect by a victory of his own equally decisive, i.e. by tak-
ing Harrisburg, Philadelphia, Baltimore, or even Wash-
ington. 3. He knew the North was tiring of the war, that the terms
of enlistment of her soldiers were expiring, and he thought a great
defeat now would tend to make her accept peace on the basis of
Southern independence. Calling to him Longstreet's corps, which was
not in the battle of Chancellorsville, he had nearly 80,000
men, while his antagonist could hardly muster more until
the new levies could be assembled. The rest of his army was in two
corps : Jackson's old corps, now commanded by Ewell, and another
commanded by A. P. Hill. To Ewell was given the van, and he
LEE IN PENNSYLVANIA 559
started June 10 for the Shenandoah valley, which he easily cleared of
union troops. June 15 he began to cross the Potomac, whence he
moved to Hagerstown, Maryland. A few days' march behind him
went Hill, and after him Longstreet, so that by June 26 the three
corps were across the Potomac. So well did Lee's cavalry screen his
movements that these initial stages of his campaign were accom-
plished without revealing his' intentions to Hooker. But in the last
days of June its leader, Jeb Stuart, made one of his daring
raids, passing between Washington and the federal army Jhe
into Pennsylvania. He reached York after Early had left cavalry6™
it, went on to Carlisle, to find Ewell was not there, and only
arrived at Gettysburg on 'July 2, his horses so exhausted that they
were not fit for service. At Hanover, on his march, Stuart had a
sharp battle with the federal horse, an arm which Hooker had brought
to a high state of efficiency. His absence from Lee's immediate front
gave the federal commander an opportunity to observe the confeder-
ate movements, and the result was a more rapid union concentration
than Lee had expected.
Meanwhile, Ewell marched rapidly toward Harrisburg. June 27, he
reached Carlisle and sent Early's division eastward to York, which
was forced to pay a contribution. Early tried to seize
the Columbia bridge over the Susquehanna, so as to ap-
proach the state capital from the east; but a retreating Harrisburg.
militia regiment had the forethought to burn the bridge, and
this point marked the limit of Early's eastern advance. At the same
time Ewell, halting at Carlisle, prepared to attack Harrisburg with
his main force. His cavalry, in fact, reached the Susquehanna oppo-
site the town, but on June 29, Lee, who with Longstreet and Hill had
reached Chambersburg, ordered him back with all his corps, and the
Pennsylvania capital was no longer in danger.
Lee's order to Ewell was due to an unexpectedly rapid concentra-
tion of the union army. Hooker, who was at cross purposes with
Halleck, was forced to remain in Virginia as long as Lee .
was there. When at last he crossed the Potomac to
Frederick, he had been so hampered by his superiors that
the union columns were widely separated. In despair of getting them
together, he proposed to resign. The offer was accepted, and thus it
happened that on June 27 General Meade was placed in command.
He was an able general, of the McClellan school, and he could get
on with Halleck. He hastened northward to place himself between
Lee and Baltimore, entering Pennsylvania June 30. Lee
was at Chambersburg when he learned he was being J^on^ntl
pursued, Hill and Longstreet with him. The former he Gettysburg.
sent to Gettysburg at once, and ordered the latter to fol-
low, while Ewell was directed to move from his advanced position
to the same place. This convinced Meade, then at Taneytown,
S6o THE WAR IN THE EAST
Maryland, that Lee sought a battle, and he selected the ground he
would take at Pipe Creek, just south of the Maryland line — about
13 miles from Gettysburg. To delay Lee, he sent Reynolds forward
to Gettysburg with three corps, expecting they would fall back as
they were pressed. Ahead of them marched Buford's cavalry, which
arrived at Gettysburg June 30, in the night.
Three roads from the south and southeast converge on Gettys-
burg, from Emmitsburg, Taneytown, and Baltimore. Along them
on the morning of July i marched the union troops from
Battlefield s*x to thirty miles away. Of the several roads on the
west and north, one leads from Chambersburg, and along
it were marching Hill and Longstreet, while another approaches from
Carlisle, and along it came Ewell. Just south of the town in the
sharp angle between the Emmitsburg and Taneytown roads is a hill
on whose top was the town cemetery. The ground rises to it gently,
and from its southern edge a ridge runs away for a mile or more,
beyond which is a small hill, Little Round Top, and a much larger
one, Round Top. East of the cemetery is a slight depression, beyond
which is another elevation, Gulp's Hill. Taken as a whole it offers
an ideal battlefield for an army fighting on the defensive. Its gentle
slope gives good play for artillery. Stone walls and bowlders on its
crest furnish cover for the infantry, its outward curve makes its in-
terior lines short and easy, and the hills at either extremity protect
it against flanking movements.
Past this strong position rode Buford when he entered the town,
Reynolds's infantry a few miles behind him. He well knew the con-
federates were approaching, and early in the morning
The Battle rnoved out on the roads by which they marched. Across
Jul^i. ' tne Chambersburg pike, three-quarters of a mile from
Gettysburg, he posted his men on a wooded height known
as Seminary Ridge. At nine o'clock Hill's van came in sight, halted,
formed a line of battle, and opened fire. Every moment the line
grew stronger, and about eleven Buford was about to be driven back
when Reynolds's force arrived and the fight continued, brigades on
each side being thrown into the battle line as fast as they arrived.
Just before noon Reynolds was killed. His men were discouraged,
but held their position until 3 o'clock, when Swell's corps was coming
up from the north. They formed on Hill's left and enveloped the
union right so that it fell back, lest it be surrounded. Hill now ad-
vanced and held Seminary Ridge, while Ewell pushed his line through
Gettysburg to the town's southern limits, five hundred
yards from the cemetery on the hill. This quiet spot was
portunity. tne scene of much confusion as the union columns reached
it. Cannon were not in position for defense, and the men
were too tired to make a spirited stand. If Ewell had advanced with
his relatively fresh troops, he must have carried the hill and forced
A THREE DAYS' BATTLE 561
the union troops to concentrate at Pipe's Creek. But Ewell let the
opportunity go, and Hancock, who had just arrived to take Reynolds's
place, recognizing the strength of the position, intrenched as rapidly
as possible, placed his guns in position, and sent messengers urging
Meade to bring up all the troops. By dark they were arriving rapidly,
and at one o'clock in the morning Meade arrived and confirmed Han-
cock's decision to fight at Gettysburg. By dawn Cemetery Ridge
was well defended.
By this time Lee's army was at Gettysburg, or in easy distance.
Hill lay on Seminary Ridge, stretching away to the southward. Ewell
was on Hill's left, his own left going as far east as Gulp's
Hill, and Longstreet, who at nightfall of the ist was on
the Chambersburg Pike in Hill's rear, was ordered to ^y 2
move at dawn as quietly as possible to Hill's right and
seize Little Round Top, from which batteries, as Lee saw, could sweep
the whole union line. Had the order been given to a Stonewall Jackson,
it would probably have been executed ; but Longstieet did not favor
forcing the battle and wished to flank Meade out of his strong posi-
tion. He did not get his force into position until the afternoon, and
when he charged against the hill it had been occupied by a federal
force, and the assault was driven back. But just north of the hill
Longstreet encountered Sickles's corps, thrown out beyond the ridge,
and against it he delivered a severe battle. Meade sent division after
division to stem the tide, and by six o'clock the attack here was re-
pelled, although Sickles, severely wounded, was driven back to the
top of the ridge. During the afternoon, but later, Ewell
made an attack on Meade's right. At Gulp's Hill he ^™{*ks
carried all before him, and when his advance was stopped j^y 2 '
by darkness, his troops were within dangerous proximity
to the union rear. That night Meade held a council of war. He had
been pushed back on both wings, and the losses were heavy ; but it
was decided to stand another day and fight the battle to a finish.
To Gibbon, commanding the union center, Meade remarked: "Your
turn will come to-morrow. To-day he has struck the flanks. Next,
it will be the center."
July 3, the attack came, most dramatically. Early in the morning
there was severe fighting around Gulp's Hill, but the federal lines held.
The rest of the forenoon the two lines lay quietly on their
arms, a mile or more apart. At i o'clock came the sharp The Attack
crack of two rifled cannon, the signal for a cannonade center,
from the confederate guns : 80 union cannon, all that juiy 3.'
would bear on the scene, opened in reply, and for an
hour and a half the heavens reverberated in a mighty symphony.
At 2.30 P.M. the federals ceased firing, because their ammunition was
running low. Their adversaries then slackened fire, and the word
was passed to the infantry to charge the union center where Hancock
20
562 THE WAR IN THE EAST
commanded. Pickett's division, numbering 5400, stood in front of
Cemetery Ridge, a mile away, with orders to penetrate the opposing
line, supported by 10,000 men from Hill's corps. Stuart's cavalry
was made ready to follow and cut up the federals when they should
be pressed back. Longstreet was Pickett's superior. He said that
no 15,000 men could take the position, but his orders were explicit,
and he directed the advance. The charging column started as steadily
as on parade. For a quarter of a mile it was protected by a little
swale; but as it reached the crest the union guns reopened with
deadly effect. At 600 yards came canister, making great gaps in the
advancing column, which did not waver. At closer range the guns
were silent, and thick ranks of infantry, hitherto lying down behind
the batteries, rose, advanced before the guns, and poured a withering
fire into the fast diminishing column. But its approach was not
halted until it struck the union infantry, carried them back beyond
their own guns, where a new line met and checked it. For a brief
space, some said twenty minutes, but no man could count the minutes
in such a time, it held its advance ; but Hancock, still fighting though
severely wounded, threw out regiments to take it in flank, and the
assailants were either shot, captured, or driven back across the deadly
plain by which they approached. Hancock said: "I have never
seen a more formidable attack." Lee's army was badly shattered,
and he prepared to receive the countercharge he thought
Returns to wou^ surely come. But Meade's plans were defensive,
Virginia. and the confederates were allowed to remain undisturbed
in their lines. All night and all the next day they remained
in camp, and on July 5 they withdrew to the south, Meade making
no serious effort to strike them ere they crossed the Potomac on
July 13. The losses in the three days' fight, killed, wounded, and cap-
tured, were 23,003 federals and 20,451 confederates.
The battle of Gettysburg was a very hazardous undertaking from
Lee's standpoint. With an army of 70,000 he invaded enemy's terri-
tOrv ^^ ^OUS^^ an aggressive engagement against an
intrenched and well-placed army of 93,500. His attack
could only be justified on the ground that his opponents
were much worse fighters than his own men. Ordinarily he was
cautious, but he had beaten his opponents so often that he had come
to underestimate them. Pope's, Burnside's, and Hooker's campaigns
failed because of bad generalship, not because of an incapable sol-
diery. Lee assumed in his invasion that the leadership of Hooker
would continue. In Meade a better type of commander opposed
him, and at a time when the confederate general undertook a more
serious task than ever before. Meade was not a brilliant general,
but he showed no serious faults at Gettysburg, and he had in his
great battle the confidence of his army, officers and privates, as well
as the entire support of the war department, advantages not enjoyed
by either Pope, Burnside, or Hooker.
GRANT FIGHTING AND FLANKING 563
FROM THE WILDERNESS TO PETERSBURG
After Gettysburg, the two armies remained inactive in Virginia.
There was some maneuvering by which Lee managed to keep Meade
in northern Virginia, but neither general risked a battle
during the autumn. It was in this autumn that Bragg
was being forced out of Chattanooga by Rosecrans and
Grant, an operation which demanded the best efforts of each
government. In March, 1864, Grant, as we have seen (page 535), was
made lieutenant general and took command of all the union armies.
Meade was left in actual command of his army, but Grant joined
it and directed its movements. During the winter it lay north of the
Rapidan on the railroad that ran through Manassas, Lee's army just
south of the same river. Grant had 122,000 men well drilled and
amply equipped ; his adversary had about half as many, and they
lacked many of the necessities of war.
May 3, Grant moved forward by his left, crossing the Rapidan into
the dense thicket known as the Wilderness. Lee was very vigilant,
and May 5 confronted the federals in this tangle of under-
growth, whose roads he knew well. Grant's plan was to ™yderness
go ahead by sheer hard fighting, and he threw his men on May 5 and 6.
Lee's lines without hesitation. In such a place his su-
periority in artillery was of little use, and the two days' fighting was a
severe contest of infantry against infantry (May 5 and 6). The
result was a check for each army ; for, the battle ended, each force
stood in its tracks. Grant had thought Lee would fall back. Dis-
appointed in this, he determined to flank still further to the enemy's
right, and May 8 reached Spottsylvania Court House, twelve miles to
the southeast. His movement was observed by Lee, whom he found
across the road well intrenched. Should it be an attack or
a flanking movement? Grant chose the former. Time Spo.tts£1~
after time he assaulted or skirmished, thinking to break House, °1
the lines by sheer weight of superior numbers. At every May 8-21.
point he was repulsed. May 12, the fighting and losses
were heaviest ; for on this day the union loss was 8500. At last the
commander gave up his attempt to break through, and flanked again
by the left. From May 5 to 21, his total loss was 34,000. It was
at Spottsylvania that he wrote the dispatch in which he said: "I
propose to fight it out on this line, if it takes all summer."
May 23, Grant reached the North Anna, only to find Lee on its
south bank so well fortified that even Grant did not assail. The
result was another flank march to the east, Lee always
anticipating the maneuver. By this means the two Cold Harbor,
armies reached by May 28 the ground McClellan occupied jg^ 3
in May, 1862. June 2, after heavy skirmishing, they
faced one another at Cold Harbor, six miles from the fortifications of
564 THE WAR IN THE EAST
Richmond. Grant wished to crush the confederate army before it
entered these defenses, and gave orders for an attack all along the line.
It was delivered at dawn, June 3, in a grand assault by 80,000 men.
Officers and privates were confident it would fail, but they did not
flinch. No troops could withstand the heavy fire they encountered,
and in twenty-two minutes the assault failed with a loss of 7000.
Hancock's corps alone lost 3000. The space between the lines was
covered with the dead and wounded, but Grant would not ask for a
truce to remove them, and for four days they were neglected. The
confederate loss was about 600. For his indifference to human life
at Cold Harbor, Grant was severely criticized. He himself later de-
clared the assault an error. The result convinced him that Lee was
not to be crushed in battle, and he moved for the James river in order
to lay siege to Richmond. From the Rapidan to the James his total
loss was 54,929. Lee lost about 19,000.
THE END OF THE WAR
June 14, Grant crossed the James at City Point. At Bermuda
Hundred, five miles to the west, Butler with a strong force lay inactive.
Two months earlier he had moved up the James, with
First 30,000 men, to take Petersburg, commanding Richmond
aglkJsf8 from the soutn- But s° soon as ne left nis base at City
Petersburg. Point, Beauregard, commanding the confederates, had
threatened his communications, beaten off his assault on
the Richmond defenses at Drury's Bluff, and " bottled him up."
To him came Grant on June 14 with orders to attack Peters-
burg at once. Butler did not move promptly, and next day Smith,
leading Grant's advance corps, was ordered to take the city, then
very weakly defended. He advanced, took the outworks, but
halted. Had he gone forward that night, he might have succeeded.
But next day troops were sent to oppose him, and all hope of
surprising Petersburg was lost. June 18, Lee, at last convinced
that his enemy was south of the river, moved his army to Peters-
burg. Grant wasted 10,000 lives in trying to carry
it by assault, and then settled down to siege operations.
July 30 a great mine was sprung under the, confederate works,
and for a moment an open road existed into the rear of their
position ; but here also was mismanagement. The troops
Crater » which ought to have poured through hesitated — probably
through fault of their division commander, and the con-
federates, rallying, were able to drive back with great slaughter the
assaulting column. This bloody affair of "the Crater" cost Grant
4000 lives without any compensating advantage.
These misfortunes created great distress throughout the North.
Grant, it was whispered, was drinking again, and all his costly sacri-
THE BITTER LESSONS OF WAR 565
fice of men, at this time 75,000 since he crossed the Rapidan, had not
given him the confederate capital. But his work was not lost. Lee
had been greatly weakened, and his exhausted government
was' not able to send him reinforcements. Through- Depression
out the autumn and winter the union army worked stead- f^th^°pe
ily with pick and spade, and every week it became more North,
and more evident that ultimate success was certain.
July i, while the siege progressed, Lee sent Early with 17,000 men to
drive the federal forces from the Shenandoah valley and to threaten
Washington. The confederates moved rapidly, driving Sigel's weak
opposition before them. They crossed the Potomac and turned east-
ward. At the Monocacy Lew Wallace delayed them a day with a
weak force, but they put him to flight, and July n, in the afternoon,
were at the doors of the national capital. Had Early continued his
advance the place might have been taken, but he delayed until morn-
ing and was repulsed by troops which had arrived during the night
from Grant's army. Early then fell back, and by good management
escaped his pursuers to Strasburg, Virginia. Four days later he again
moved north, defeating a union force at Kerns town and sending a
column into Pennsylvania, where Chambersburg was burned because
it did not pay a contribution. This action was not justifiable.
To drive Early from the Valley, Grant now sent Sheridan with
40,000 infantry and 15,000 cavalry. Lee also sent reenforcements
before which Sheridan retired to the Potomac. But Lee
was in dire need at Petersburg, and withdrew the succor Sheridan
he had sent. Sheridan then assumed the offensive with th^VaUey8
twice his opponents' strength. In two battles — Win-
chester, September 19, and Fisher's Hill, September 22 — he drove his
opponent far southward with severe loss on both sides. Then Sheridan,
with Grant's permission, adopted a policy of devastation. Barns,
mills, and even residences were burned, grain, cattle, horse, and agri-
cultural implements were taken or destroyed, and the rich valley was
left so denuded of supplies that, as Sheridan said, "a crow flying over
the country would need to carry his rations." It was the very frenzy
of war, and was defended on the ground that it made it impossible for
a confederate army in the future to operate by this way against
Washington.
In the South a sharp cry for vengeance arose, and Lee again sent
reenforcements to Early, who took the offensive. Following the fed-
erals, he came upon them at Cedar Creek, October 19, when
their commander was absent. The attack at dawn on front *J*£j of
and flank was a surprise, and seemed a complete success, creek.
Only the sixth corps stood firm, but it fell back four miles
trying to rally the fugitives as it went. Had Early concentrated
his force on this splendid body, he might have had complete success.
Sheridan slept the preceding night at Winchester, twenty miles from
566 THE WAR IN THE EAST
his army. Riding leisurely southward in the morning he learned of
the situation at front and rode rapidly to the scene. At noon he was
at the head of the sixth corps, had rallied the fugitives, and was
marching confidently against Early, who believed himself the victor.
Though taken unawares, the confederates fought courageously, but
were swept off the field by the superior numbers of the union forces.
At nightfall they were in flight before Sheridan's cavalry, and they
were never again a menace to Washington.
The first weeks of 1865 saw the confederacy in imminent danger of
collapse. Hood was crushed in Tennessee, Early was driven from the
Valley, federal cavalry rode at will throughout all of
Hampton Virginia north of the James, and Sherman marched with-
Conference out °PP°siti°n through the Carolinas. Lee's army in
February°3,' Richmond, poorly fed and clothed, was no more than 50,000
1865. men, and Johnston, who sought to check Sherman, had
only 37,000. Southern defeat was so clearly inevitable
that it was believed the confederate government must accept peace
if it was offered. Under these conditions private individuals secured
a meeting of commissioners on each side at Hampton Roads, Feb-
ruary 3, 1865. Lincoln attended on the part of the North. He
offered to end the war if the South would accept emancipation and
submit to the authority of the union. He also promised to ask
congress to pay the slaveholders for the slaves, but he frankly
said he could not promise that congress would accept the sug-
gestion.
The negotiation failed because Jefferson Davis insisted that the
independence of the South should be the basis of any agreement.
Had he been less blindly persistent, an armistice might have been
arranged, during which Lincoln could have brought congress to some
form of compromise by which much of the turmoil of reconstruction
days would have been avoided.
As spring approached, Grant before Petersburg threw his left out to
reach the Petersburg and Lynchburg railroad, one of the two lines by
which supplies were carried into Richmond. To oppose
Taken°n ^im, ^ee must extend his own line, which by reason of
his inferior numbers became very thin. April i , Sheridan
was sent against the extreme confederate right at Five Forks and
won a success. It was nine at night when Grant heard the result, and
he immediately ordered an assault at dawn along his entire front.
This also resulted favorably, the confederate works being penetrated
at two points. April 3, he proposed to press his advantage and throw
his left still farther around Petersburg. Threatened thus with a
complete envelopment, Lee decided to evacuate Petersburg during
the night and concentrate his troops, scattered around Richmond,
on the southwest of the city, so as to escape along the line of railroad
to Danville. To this end he gave Davis notice at 10.40 A.M., on the
A GENEROUS CONQUEROR 567
2d, in order that the confederate officials might escape from the
doomed city. April 3, his army was marching along four roads which
converged at Amelia Court House on the Danville railroad, thirty-five
miles from Richmond. He hoped in this way to join Johnston, who,
then near Raleigh, North Carolina, was ordered to Greensboro, fifty
miles south of Danville.
Grant sent troops to hold the evacuated city, but lost not a moment
in jubilation. His object was to bag the quarry before a junction with
the North Carolina force could be effected. He marched
by every road available, often fighting when Lee threw out overtaken
a force to protect the confederate rear. In the morning of
the 4th, Lee reached Amelia Court House, where he expected supplies.
None were at hand, and he lost a precious day collecting them. On
the 5th, Sheridan with the cavalry seized the railroad to Danville,
which caused the confederates to turn towards Lynchburg. On short
rations, dispirited, and sick, they were deserting in squads. Sheridan
followed rapidly, and during the evening of April 8 got in front of Lee
at Appomattox Court House. At the same time, a large body of
infantry under Ord, by marching throughout the night, also got around
and took position behind Sheridan. Next morning, the Qth, Lee or-
dered his weary troops to disperse the cavalry and march toward
Lynchburg. As they moved out Sheridan drew off his troopers and
revealed Ord's solid formation, an obstacle the confederates could not
overcome. It was the end of the chase.
Lee now raised a white flag and met Grant at the McLean house in
Appomattox village. He wore a handsome gray uniform and a
splendid sword, and was in striking contrast with the victor,
who was dressed in " a rough traveling suit" with the straps The
r T i AT,, r • ji Surrender,
of a lieutenant general. After some friendly con versa- April 9, 1865.
tion Lee inquired on what terms surrender would be re-
ceived. Then Grant wrote out the conditions, which were accepted.
Officers and men were to be paroled and not to fight again until ex-
changed, in consideration of which they were not to be disturbed by
the federal government so long as they observed the law. Officers
were to retain their side arms, their horses, when they owned them,
and their private baggage. Lee, after a moment's hesitation, said that
many of his cavalrymen and artillerists owned their horses, and Grant
agreed that they might keep them "for the spring plowing." By
these terms Lee did not have to surrender his sword, a generous cour-
tesy on Grant's part which endeared him to Southern people. A touch-
ing farewell of Lee to his own soldiers, reduced by his march and deser-
tion to 26,765, completed the tragic event. The broken host in gray
returned to their homes, and their commander rode back to Richmond.
Grant's soldiers marched back to the James river, and the northern'
part of the nation broke into paeans of joy that the bitter struggle was
over.
568 THE WAR IN THE EAST
Lincoln was at City Point when Richmond was evacuated. On the
gth he returned to Washington, deeply concerned with the work of
restoration. To one who said that Jefferson Davis must
Lincoln be hanged, he replied, "Judge not, that ye be not
ApSSi4, judged." On the i4th he met his cabinet and discussed
1865. a policy of reconstruction. "I hope there will be no
persecution," he said, "no bloody work after the war is
over. No one need expect me to take any part in hanging or killing
those men, even the worst of them. . . . We must extinguish our
resentments if we expect harmony and union." That evening he
attended the theater with his family. While the play progressed,
John Wilkes Booth, an actor who foolishly thought he was redressing
the wrongs of the South, gained access to the president's box, fatally
wounded him with a pistol shot, and escaped with a broken leg, by
leaping to the stage, whence he passed to the street and rode rapidly
away into Maryland. He managed to escape to Virginia, where he
was tracked to his lair and shot at bay in a burning barn. One of his
accomplices wounded Seward seriously in his house. Four conspir-
ators were hanged, including Mrs. Surratt, who was probably innocent,
and several others were imprisoned.
Lincoln lived until 7.22 A.M. on the i5th. His death was a poignant
blow to the nation. In the darkest hours of the war he had never
wavered in hope and effort ; in a thousand trying events
Greatness ^e nac^ snown good sense and persistent good will ; in
many a personal attack he had borne himself with patience
and self-f orgetf ul fortitude ; and in every phase of the war he had
been the chief support of union. He was great in all the great phases
of public leadership, but greatest of all in that overspreading con-
sciousness that all the people, white men and black men, Northern
men and Southern men, were within the bounds of his responsibility
and protection.
When Lee surrendered, Sherman was at Goldsboro, North Carolina,
and Johnston was near Raleigh, fifty miles to the west. Hearing that
Lee marched for Danville, the latter had turned toward
Greensboro, where he stood when he heard the news
from Appomattox. To him came Jefferson Davis, fleeing
southward. The confederate president wished the general to march
to the mountains and carry on the war. Johnston objected, saying
the soldiers desired peace, and it was agreed that he should ask for
terms of surrender. April 17 and 18 he met Sherman at Durham,
North Carolina, where an armistice was agreed to pending the refer-
ence of certain terms of peace to the president. These terms embraced
the recognition by the president of the governments of the states then
in condition of resistance, the reestablishment of the federal courts in
the South, and the parole of officers and privates of all the confederate
armies still in existence. Sherman consented to these terms because
WORK OF THE BLOCKADERS 569
he thought it would be difficult to bag Johnston and because his army
did not relish another campaign in the region through which it had
recently fought. But he had exceeded his instructions, and his terms
were disapproved by the government in Washington because they
dealt with civil affairs. Then Johnston accepted the terms offered
Lee by Grant, April 26, and disbanded his army, numbering 37,047.
May 4, General Taylor surrendered all the troops in Alabama and
Mississippi, and May 26, Kirby Smith surrendered his
department west of the Mississippi river. The total
number of confederates who thus laid down their arms,
in these momentous two months, was 174,223. May 10, Jefferson
Davis was captured in southern Georgia and sent prisoner to Fortress
Monroe. Alexander Stephens and other high confederate officers
were also made prisoners ; but all were eventually released.
FEDERAL NAVAL OPERATIONS
The work of the navy during the civil war resolved itself into three
spheres of activity : (i) the blockade, (2) cooperation with the army
in land operations on the coast, and on the rivers, and (3) chasing
down and destroying the small number of commerce destroyers the
confederacy was able to place on the sea.
The blockade was proclaimed May 19, 1861, and a dozen ships
were at once sent to the most important harbors in the South. By
purchasing merchant ships, and even tugs, and building new
ships, this number grew steadily until three hundred B{^kade
were on the blockading line at the end of the war. They
were divided into four squadrons, the North Atlantic, from Fortress
Monroe to Cape Fear; the South Atlantic, including the coasts of
South Carolina, Georgia, and Eastern Florida ; the East Gulf, including
the coasts of Western Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and a part of
Louisiana ; and the West Gulf, from the mouth of the Mississippi to
the Rio Grande. Life on the blockaders was monotonous. There
were days and nights of watching, the ships lying a few miles off the
harbor during the day and closing in to anchor during the night,
like sentinels on each side of the harbor's entrance. Occasionally,
usually in the night, a luckless blockade runner was seized as she tried
to dart through the opening. Sometimes she stole through so cau-
tiously as to elude the blockaders, and sometimes she was forced on
the shallows and burned by her crew in order to avoid capture. The
blockaders did not dare follow her under the guns of the confederate
forts which usually commanded the interior channels.
Early in 1862 the South undertook to break the blockade by con-
structing heavy ironclads. The first undertaken was named the
Virginia, though history remembers her as the Merrimac, the name
she bore as a merchantman before the war began. Her super-
570 THE WAR IN THE EAST
structure was removed and a roof of railroad rails took its place
with heavy guns beneath the roof. March 8, 1862, this dangerous
craft steamed out of Norfolk harbor and destroyed three
The. federal frigates off Newport News. Next day she reap-
andAfer- peared to complete her work of ruin. She encountered a
rimac. strange-looking ironclad craft, a hulk level with the water and
supporting a revolving turret within which were powerful
guns. It was the Monitor, designed by Ericsson and appropriately
described as "a raft with a cheese-box on it." A fierce encounter
followed, at the end of which the Southern ship retired in a damaged
condition. She did not resume the attempt to raise the blockade.
The conflict proved the efficiency of ironclad ships and opened a new
era in naval construction. The American government built many
monitors before the war ended.
The most important movements of the navy in cooperation with
the army against harbors and on the rivers were as follows: i. The
attack on Roanoke Island, August 29, 1861. The navy
In Eastern seized Hatteras and Ocracoke inlets, in North Carolina,
Carolina. giymg the North command of the entrance to Pamplico
and Albemarle sounds. In the following January an
expedition under General Burnside took Roanoke island, lying
between these sounds, and afterwards Newbern and Plymouth
on the mainland were occupied. The first intention was by this
approach to move into the interior of North Carolina and cut off
supplies for Richmond, but on consideration the project was given
up as impossible. The expedition was serviceable because it effec-
tually blockaded this part of the coast.
2. Operations against Charleston, November 7, 1861. Port Royal,
South Carolina, was taken, giving the South Atlantic squadron an
excellent base. Immediately afterwards the sea islands
Car^Sa1 were seizef From Port R°Yal in tne following April,
Waters. an expedition took Fort Pulaski, commanding the mouth
of the Savannah river. As the smaller harbors fell easy
prey, it happened that by midsummer of 1862 all the Atlantic coast
was under federal control, except Wilmington, N. C., and Charleston.
Against the latter a strong fleet of newly constructed monitors was
sent in April, 1863. It sailed boldly into the harbor, but retired with
much loss from the fire of Forts Sumter and Moultrie with the aid of
other shore batteries. In July the attack was renewed, an army now
landing and moving against the defenses on Morris Island, south of
the harbor, while the fleet at close range attacked the works on the
island. Before the line of advance was Battery Wagner — often called
"Fort Wagner," a work strongly placed and well defended. Two
unsuccessful assaults were made on it, in the second of which fell
Colonel Robert G. Shaw at the head of his negro regiment. After
a seven days' bombardment from the fleet, Fort Sumter was in ruins,
although a small infantry force remained in it until the evacuation of
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 571
Charleston, February 17, 1865. By regular approaches Battery
Wagner was at last taken and Morris Island was in federal hands;
a useless achievement, for the harbor was supposed to be mined and
no further attempt was made against the place for a year and a half.
Besides the capture of New Orleans, 1862, the most notable naval
achievement in the gulf region was seizing Mobile bay in 1864. The
place was an important outlet for blockade runners and was well
defended by Fort Morgan and several vessels, among them the
powerful ram, Tennessee. ' August 5, Farragut, with eighteen ships,
four of them monitors, ran past the fort and batteries and engaged
the fleet within the bay. The Tennessee became the target of the
union fleet. Ship after ship struck her armored sides, desirous of
sinking her. She withstood their blows, but having a weak engine,
could not be brought effectively against her opponents. Finally her
steering gear was disabled and she surrendered. The rest of the con-
federate ships retired or were destroyed, and the fort capitulated when
5000 troops had been landed. The city of Mobile was not taken until
the following spring.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For the Eastern campaigns the same general works and sources are available as
for the Western operations (see p. 543) . Of a more specific nature are the following :
McClellan's Own Story (1887), contains many letters; Swinton, Campaigns of the
Army of the Potomac (1882) ; Grant, Personal Memoirs, 2 vols. (1895) ; Sheridan,
Personal Memoirs, 2 vols. (1902) ; Walker, W ' . S. Hancock (1894) ; Poore, Ambrose
E. Burnside (1882) ; Butler, Butler's Book, 2 vols. (1892); Cox, Military Reminis-
cences, 2 vols. (1900) ; Bache, George Gordon Meade (1897) ; Haupt, Reminiscences
(1901) ; Long, Robert Edward Lee (1886) ; Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox
(1903); J. E. Johnston, Narrative of Military Operations (1874); Hood, Advance
and Retreat (1880); McClellan, /. E. B. Stuart (1885); Henderson, Stonewall
Jackson, 2 vols. (1900); and Alexander, Military Memoirs, (1907).
On army experiences, besides the authorities mentioned on page 543, see : Noyes,
The Bivouac and the Battlefield (1863) ; Townsend, Campaigns of a Non-Combatant
(1866) ; Eggleston, A Rebel's Recollection (1905) ; Maury, Recollections of a Vir-
ginian (1894) ; McGuire, Diary of a Southern Refugee (1865) ; Sorrel, Recollections
of a Confederate Staff-Officer (1905) ; Stiles, Four Years under Marse Robert (1903) ;
and Taylor, Four Years with Lee (1878).
On naval history of the civil war see first of all : Official Records of the Union
and Confederate Navies, 22 vols. (1894-1908). See also Maclay, History of the United
States Navy, 3 vols. (ed. 1898-1901) ; Scharf, History of the Confederate States Navy
(1894); Porter, Naval History of the Civil War (1886); Semmes, Service Afloat
(1887), relates to the Alabama; Wilson, Iron-Clods in Action (1897); Bennett,
The Monitor and the Navy under Steam (1900) ; Wilkinson, Narrative of a
Blockade Runner (1877) J and Mahan, Farragut (1892).
For Independent Reading
Rhodes, History of the United States, vols. III-V (1900-1906), the best general
history of the war, and it is readable. Other suggested works are : Porter, Cam-
paigning with Grant (1897); Walker, W. S. Hancock (1894); Eggleston, A
Rebel's Recollections (1905) ; Dana, Recollections of the Civil War (1898) ; Wise,
The End of an Era (1899) ; Schaff, The Sunset of the Confederacy (1912) ; Bradford,
Lee the American (1912) ; Stiles, Four Years under Marse Robert (1903) ; and Ben-
nett, The Monitor and the Navy under Steam (1900).
CHAPTER XXVII
CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
ENLISTING TROOPS, NORTH AND SOUTH
THE first soldiers enlisted on each side were volunteers, furnished
by the states in response to calls made by the respective presidents.
They came freely in a period of great enthusiasm, and
Armies8 were °^ t^ie ^est °luanty- But ardor eventually cools,
and by the end of 1862 volunteering in the North was
nearly at an end. In the South it ceased to be considerable at an
earlier date. By this time the federal congress realized how serious
a struggle was being waged, and used its power to enforce military
service. The result was a law ordering a draft of all men liable for
military duty. Enrollment districts were created, and drafts were
held by officers duly appointed. A man drafted might furnish a
substitute or be exempt on payment of $300.
The act was attacked by the democrats as unconstitutional, and
it undoubtedly contravened the principles of state rights to which
they were bred. Although it was generally enforced, the
Riirtsin criticism of the democrats found much support with the
New York. People who were unable to secure substitutes or purchase
exemption. In New York the Eastside population broke
into riots. The people were largely foreign-born, and recognized an
ancient grievance in forced military service. On the second day of
the draft, July 13, 1863, they broke up the drawings and, joined
by habitual thieves, looted stores until they ruled in the city from
Union Square to Central Park. Negroes were beaten and hanged to
lamp posts, well-to-do citizens were robbed, and the police were
powerless. The city had been stripped of soldiers to oppose Lee at
Gettysburg, but at last on July 14 an armed force of more than
3000 policemen, marines, and citizens were able to check the depreda-
tions. Next day troops began to arrive, and by the i6th the mob
was under control, after 1000 persons had been killed or wounded and
private property worth $1,500,000 had been destroyed. Investiga-
tion showed that the allotments of the democratic enrollment districts
were excessive, and when the error was corrected the draft proceeded
quietly. News that the chief Northern city was resisting the draft
572
ENFORCING CONSCRIPTION 573
gave the confederates a passing hope that the North would not sup-
port the war.
After July, 1863, the people accepted the draft as a military neces-
sity, but it was very unpopular. Out of 470,942 persons drawn in
two drafts in 1864, July 18 and December 19, those
failing to report were 94,636. To stimulate enlistment, yul^UjJl*y "»»
large bounties were offered, not only by the federal govern-
ment, but by the state and county authorities. In New York City
in 1864 these aggregated $677. The regular pay of a private was
$16 a month. Two evils now appeared, " bounty-jumping" and the
activities of substitute brokers. The latter fixed the scale of payments
for substitutes, and often were able to prevent the acceptance of a
man as a substitute who did not have their services. They were in
close association with " bounty-jumpers," men who deserted as soon
as the bounty was received and enlisted elsewhere under other names.
A case was discovered in which a man had " jumped "the bounty
thirty- two times. Serious charges were made in many places involving
the integrity of officers and physicians who conducted enlistments.
The system was undoubtedly badly administered; but there was
little disposition to look closely into it as long as it furnished men
for the defense of union. The early enlistments were the pick of
Northern manhood, and to the last there was excellent material in
the new men ; but as the months passed, the proportion of newly
arrived foreigners and shirkers increased. This gave rise to the
charge that the armies were recruited from European mercenaries.
When the war ended there were 1,052,038 men in the army.
In 1863, after the emancipation policy was adopted, negro troops
began to be enlisted. Among the prisoners captured in New Orleans,
May, 1862, was a colored regiment organized by the con-
federates. This was an example which the antislavery
element of the republican party in the North thought
worthy of imitation. Lincoln, with the opinion of the border states
in mind, opposed such a step ; but the confiscation act of the summer
of 1862 gave him authority to use such troops for the defense of the
union. In the final emancipation proclamation he announced that
negro volunteers would be accepted. The first regiment of them was
the 54th Massachusetts, led by Colonel Robert Gould Shaw, socially
and intellectually eminent in Boston. Many persons had predicted
that negroes would not fight, but the result proved the contrary.
Though generally used for garrison duty, they exhibited marked
courage in some severe emergencies. At Fort Wagner Shaw's regi-
ment charged most bravely and suffered severe loss. Grant, and
many others in a position to know, declared that the negro troops
fought well. At the end of the war 183,000 had been enlisted.
The confederate congress enacted May i, 1863, that white officers
commanding negro soldiers should when captured be treated as
574 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
persons inciting blacks to insurrection, but there is no evidence
that the threat was carried into execution. Negro soldiers when
captured were sometimes killed by their captors, but
Negro such cases as occurred were due to the feelings of the
as War* privates and not by order of the confederate authorities.
Prisoners. The most notable case was at the capture of Fort Pillow
by Forrest, April 12, 1864; but investigation showed this
was without orders of Forrest, who offered to receive the negroes
as prisoners of war when he demanded the surrender of the fort. His
demand was refused, and as no flag of surrender was raised, his storm-
ing party slew its defenders, white and black, who fought desperately,
until Forrest himself arrived on the scene and stopped the slaughter.
When negro prisoners were identified as escaped slaves they were
returned to their masters. The confederacy was unwilling to exchange
negro prisoners, and on that ground all exchanges stopped for a while ;
but from this attitude the confederates retreated early in 1864, only
proposing to retain those who were known to be fugitive slaves. At
this time Grant was determined to send no prisoners back to swell the
ranks of the Southern armies, and no exchanges of any kind occurred
until January, 1865, when the confederacy was in its last gasps.
FEDERAL FINANCES
Providing funds for war expenses was a mammoth task. When
congress met in extra session, July 4, 1861, the national debt was
considered large at $76,000,000. The people, therefore,
of jgg"res were startled when they knew that the legislature had
authorized a loan of $250,000,000 in bonds and interest-
bearing notes. Additional taxes were laid by which it was expected
that a total revenue of $75,000,000 would be raised. Two features
of the plan were a tax of three per cent on incomes over $800, and a
direct tax. It was believed that these taxes were as heavy as the
country would stand. The execution of the financial laws fell on Chase,
who proved himself an able secretary of the treasury.
But expenses were enormous, and when congress met again, Decem-
ber 2, there was a deficit of $143,000,000. The war had sorely dis-
tressed business, bonds were selling slowly, specie had
The Legal been drawn out of the country, and December 30 the
of^ebruar banks suspended specie payment, compelling the govern-
25, 1862. ment to follow their example. Something must be done
quickly or the war could not go on. The result was the
law generally known as the Legal Tender Act of February 25, 1862,
providing for: i. The issue of $100,000,000 in treasury notes, which,
as well as the $50,000,000 authorized in July, 1861, were to be legal
tender for all dues except the payment of import duties ; and 2. The
issue of an additional loan of $500,000,000 in six per cent 5-20 bonds,
NATIONAL BANKS 575
interest payable in coin. There was much opposition to the legal
tender feature of the bill, and Secretary Chase hesitated long before
accepting it. It was passed because it was pronounced absolutely
necessary in the crisis at hand. At the same time another bill was
carried through congress to raise import duties and lay other taxes.
It was so comprehensive that it has been called "an act which taxed
everything." A proposition to create a national banking system was
deferred to another date. By the measures here adopted it was
expected that the funds would be obtained to defray the war expenses
for a year. The expenditures were then $2,000,000 a day.
At the beginning of 1863 the treasury was again empty, and clamor
arose for more legal tender. Congress yielded to the extent of author-
izing $100,000,000, a measure which Lincoln regretfully
approved. It also authorized a loan of $900,000,000. The.
February 25 it took a more important step in passing a
national banking act, by which it was designed to charter Act, 1863.
banks under national authority with the privilege of
issuing money secured by national bonds. The act as passed
proved inadequate, and was amended from time to time. The plan
which resulted may be summarized as follows : i . The comptroller
of the currency, an official now first provided for, should supervise
this system. 2. Each bank before beginning business must de-
posit national bonds equal to one-third of its paid-in capital, but
the interest on these bonds was to go to the bank depositing them.
3. It would receive from the comptroller bank notes in amount equal
to ninety per cent of the market value of the deposited bonds, and
when signed by the officers of the bank these notes were to be receiv-
able for all dues to the United States except imports. 4. The capital
stock of a national bank was not to be less than $50,000. 5. A national
bank must keep a cash reserve equal to 15 per cent of its circulation,
but one-half of this might be left with certain specified central banks,
whose reserves, it was ordered, must be 25 per cent of the circulation,
and 6. Shareholders were made responsible for the debts of the bank
above their stock held to an amount equal to the par value of their
stock. In 1865 an act was passed to tax at 10 per cent, after July i,
1866, the circulation of state banks. This law impelled state banks to
change to national banks, with the result that 1634 of the latter existed
on July i, 1866. The national banks made a market for government
bonds, and drove out of circulation the currency of the state banks.
Spite of the measures of 1863 the revenues proved insufficient,
and in 1864 import duties, excise, and most internal taxes were raised
as high as the country would stand. An additional
loan of $400,000,000 was authorized, and authority was currency. *
given to extend the amount of legal tender to $450,-
000,000. As a matter of fact, it reached during the year the sum of
$431,000,000, and went only a million higher in the following year.
576 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
The increase of national bank notes served partly to satisfy the demand
for treasury notes. The legal tender notes, popularly called " green-
backs" ceased to circulate at par with specie as soon as they were
issued. Gold rose until, June 30, 1864, it sold for 250, and when
Early was before Washington, July n, it reached 285, the highest
price during the war. As prices of commodities were expressed in
legal tender they rose proportionally with gold. Throughout the
summer of 1864 a paper dollar was worth about forty cents in gold.
One result was to drive fractional specie out of circulation. "Shin-
plasters," small private notes from 5 to 50 cents in value, took its
place, but these were eventually forbidden, and for a time postage
stamps were used. Their disadvantage was soon evident, and the
government issued fractional paper currency on its own account.
Early in the war the national bonds ceased to sell, although
the interest was 7.3 per cent. The plan of sale was to award the
bonds at a fixed rate to associated bankers in installments
Bonds at of about $50,000,000, the banks selling at home and
Subscrip- abroad at what profit they could make. In 1863 Secre-
tion, tary Chase adopted a new method. Selecting a great bank-
ing firm as his agent, Jay Cooke and Company, he offered
the bonds to the public in popular denominations. It was an appeal
to the patriotism of the nation, and was fully justified by the results.
Two confiscation acts were passed by congress, partly to get rev-
enue and partly to punish the confederates. The first, August 6,
1 86 1, authorized the confiscation of property used in
fiscatira a^ °^ ^e confederacy, and the liberation of slaves em-
Acts, ployed on fortifications or in other warlike labor. The
second, July 17, 1862, was more drastic. It fixed death
as the punishment for treason, but allowed the courts to substitute
fine and imprisonment, and it decreed that the slaves of all who sup-
ported the Southern cause should be free. It further provided for
the confiscation of the property of six classes of persons who sup-
ported the confederacy, including the higher officials, who were
believed to be especially responsible for the war. Another provision
was to authorize the enlistment of negroes in the union armies. This
second act was urged especially by the radical opponents of slavery,
and Lincoln would not sign it until congress adopted explanatory
resolutions, one of which provided that it was not to be used to extend
the taint of treason to the issue of confederates. So far as its con-
fiscatory features were concerned, it was very sparingly used during
the war, partly because Lincoln opposed severe measures, and partly
because the jurisdiction of federal courts did not in reality extend to
the vast majority of the Southerners, who were within the confed-
erate lines. At the end of the war, when federal courts were rees-
tablished in the South, a policy of conciliation prevailed, and confis-
cation was not put into operation.
BUTLER AND THE FUGITIVES 577
THE PROGRESS OF EMANCIPATION
Early in the war the extreme republicans began to urge that
measures be taken to destroy slavery. The large majority of voters
in the border states, as well as many persons in the free
states, opposed this policy, and Lincoln discountenanced De™ands
it because he felt that the only means of success was to Radicals
make the war solely for the preservation of the union.
His influence prevailed, and the day after Bull Run, congress passed,
with only nine dissenting votes in the two houses, resolutions declaring
that the North did not mean to interfere with slavery, but only sought
to perpetuate the union. From this position president and congress,
under pressure of public opinion, were to recede in a little more than
twelve months.
When Virginia seceded, May 23, General Butler commanded at
Fortress Monroe. To him came many fugitive slaves, whose owners
demanded their surrender. The request was refused by
Butler on the ground that having worked on confederate
fortifications they were "contraband of war." His
position was not legal, but he was supported by Northern opinion,
and the government did not overrule him. The first confiscation
act, August 6, 1 86 1, gave freedom to slaves working on confederate
fortifications and engaged in military operations, but it did not men-
tion ordinary fugitives, who came to Butler in great numbers. The
secretary of war was asked to define the status of the second class.
He replied that they should be received into the service of the United
States and employed as seemed best, and added that when the war
was over congress would, no doubt, "provide a just compensation
to loyal masters." Butler was also ordered to refrain from inter-
ference with the slaves of peaceful citizens and not to encourage
them to leave their masters. Nor should he prevent their voluntary
return unless the public good seemed to demand it. Such instruc-
tions left wide discretion to the generals commanding in regions
which could be reached by fugitives. Some of them were less inclined
to antislavery views than Butler, and surrendered fugitives freely.
Others gave little help to such masters as came to look for their run-
away slaves.
Of those who were most hostile to slavery was General Fremont,
presidential candidate in 1856. He was popular with the extreme
republicans, through whose influence he was called home from Europe
to command the army in Missouri. Arriving at New York early in
July, 1 86 1, he loitered three weeks in the East, conferring with political
friends before he repaired to St. Louis, where he was greatly needed.
His incompetence was soon evident from the manner in which he
yielded himself to a group of contractors who surrounded and flat-
2P
578 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
tered him for their selfish ends. Soon followed military reverses,
and public opinion rose, high against him. To regain his popularity
he issued his remarkable order of August 30, 1861, directing the
confiscation of the property of all who had taken arms against the
union, offering freedom to their slaves, and creating a "bureau of abo-
lition" to supervise the execution of the order. His action aroused
enthusiasm among the radical opponents of slavery, but alarmed the
unionists of Kentucky, then trembling in the balance. Lincoln
first knew of the order from the newspapers, and suggested to the
author that it be modified. The advice was rejected with scant
courtesy, and Lincoln coolly directed that the order be modified in
conformity with the first confiscation act. After some further mani-
festations of his incompetence, Fremont was removed, and General
Hunter succeeded to the command. The affair aroused the anger
of the radicals, who sharply criticized the president for his part in it.
Yet Lincoln wished to abolish slavery if it could be done in a proper
way, and was already moving for emancipation with compensation
in the slave states still loyal. In March, 1862, he sug-
Emancipa- gested such action to congress, and thought an average
Compensa- °^ $4°° ^ght be given for each slave in Maryland, Ken-
ton, tucky, Missouri, Delaware, and the District of Colum-
bia, incurring a total expense of $173,000,000, which was
less than the cost of the war for 87 days. The suggestion pleased
neither congress nor the people of the states concerned, and no action
was taken on it. But April 16 a bill was passed for the emancipation
with compensation of the slaves in the District of Columbia.
The second confiscation act, July 17, 1862, gave freedom to the
slaves of persons resisting the union, forbade their surrender, and
authorized their "colonization" on the abandoned lands
Second of ^ confederates. As the law would not be obeyed in
ActiSd^e the seceding states, little more was expected from it
Slaves. * than that it might serve to free fugitives who reached
the union lines. Lincoln, and many others, considered
it of doubtful constitutionality, and he gave it a mild interpretation.
For this, also, he received the censure of the radicals.
May 9, 1862, General Hunter, commanding the recovered terri-
tory around Beaufort, South Carolina, issued an order declaring
free all the slaves in South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.
He actec* on k*s own autnority, but had the approval of
Chase and the other radicals. Lincoln reversed the order
at once. But he sought to break the blow by calling on the loyal
slave states to accept gradual emancipation with compen-
Compensa- sation. In reply, the congressmen from the border states
doned. * signed an address suggesting that congress should act first
in the matter. July 14 the president laid the matter
before congress, which did nothing. By this he was convinced
THE CRITICISMS OF LINCOLN 579
that nothing was to be hoped from emancipation through compensa-
tion, and he turned to other means.
July 22 he read to his cabinet a tentative emancipation proclama-
tion to apply to the seceding states, justifying his proposed action on
the ground of military necessity. Blair alone of the
cabinet objected, as he thought the proclamation would The
endanger the autumn elections. Seward suggested that 3!en
the announcement ought to wait until the army won a tfotTproc*"
victory, otherwise the proclamation would be construed lamation.
as "the government stretching forth its hands to Ethio-
pia," a confession of weakness. This view prevailed, and the matter
was laid aside for a favorable opportunity.
The action of the cabinet was secret, and the radical opponents of
slavery, ignorant of what was going on, continued their strictures on
the president. August 20, Horace Greeley, editor of the
New York Tribune, summed up this view in an editorial «£*e ey ?,
entitled, "The Prayer of Twenty Millions." He
reproached the president for being influenced by "certain fossil poli-
ticians" from the border states, for repudiating Fremont's and
Hunter's orders and enforcing an order of Halleck to exclude fugi-
tive slaves from the union camps, and for failing to execute the pro-
visions of the second confiscation act touching slavery. Although
this "Prayer" was addressed to Lincoln, he saw it first in the news-
papers. He wrote and published in the same medium a reply which
could not fail to crush his critics in the minds of the impartial people
of the country. "As to the policy," he said, "I 'seem
to be pursuing,' as you say, I have not meant to leave pJJIJJy
anyone in doubt. I would save the Union. I would
save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the
national authority can be restored, the nearer the Union will be 'the
Union as it was.' If there be those who would not save the Union
unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with
them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they
could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them.
My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is
not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union
without freeing any slave, I would do it ; and if I could save it by
freeing all the slaves, I would do it ; and if I could save it by freeing
some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do
about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to
save the Union ; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe
it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I believe
what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I
shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct
errors when shown to be errors, and I shall adopt new views so fast
as they shall appear to be true views." This letter was widely read
and had a great influence on public opinion.
580 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
September 17 Lee's invasion of Maryland was checked at An tie-
tarn, and Lincoln on the 23d issued the celebrated preliminary eman-
cipation proclamation. It announced that the slaves
wou^ ^e declared free in all states resisting the union on
January i, 1863. It also spoke of compensation for the
slaves of loyal states. It was a warning to the South, but
it only elicited jeers from that section, and January i a final procla-
mation appeared declaring slavery abolished by military authority
in all the South except Tennessee and the parts of Louisiana and
Virginia then held by union arms. The proclamation satisfied for a
time the radicals of the North and strengthened the cause of the
union in Europe, by showing that the war was fought to put an end
to slavery. Even the border states could not complain, for they were
not affected, and it was evident that ample time had been given the
secessionists to escape emancipation by submitting to the union.
The proclamation had no basis in the law of civil affairs, as Lincoln
well knew, but he. believed it was within his authority as commander-
in-chief of the army and navy.
In the annual message, December i, 1863, Lincoln returned to
the subject of compensated emancipation for the border states, and
Compen- a k^ °f that nature to apply to Missouri passed the house
sated Eman- and had a conditional approval in the senate. But it
cipation was opposed by the democrats, mostly border state men,
again wko thought the South would not be conquered, and, as
some republicans gave it a very lukewarm support, the
measure finally failed in the short session. When congress met
again, the cause of the North was more promising on the battle-
field, and congress was less inclined to concede anything to slaveholders.
They were now concerned with an amendment abolishing slavery
outright.
Reflection showed that Lincoln's proclamation was of doubtful
constitutionality. Moreover, it abolished slavery at best in only
about half of the territory in which the institution existed,
Amendment anc* ^ ^ not Prevent tne future reestablishment of bond-
age by a state. To meet these difficulties, a thirteenth
amendment was introduced in congress, March 28, 1864. It passed
the senate, but failed to get the necessary two-thirds majority in the
house. January 31, 1865, it came up again in the house and passed
by the necessary majority. With its ratification by three-fourths of
the states, it became a part of the organic law of the land, December
18, 1865. Before it was ratified, slavery had been abolished by state
amendment in Arkansas, January, 1864; Louisiana, September, 1864;
Maryland, October, 1864 ; Tennessee, February, 1865 ; and Missouri,
June, 1865. February 5, 1865, after the thirteenth amendment had
passed, Lincoln submitted to his cabinet the draft of a message pro-
posing to pay to the slave states $400,000,000 in bonds on considera-
CLASSES OF VOTERS 581
tion that the war cease by April i. The cabinet thought such a
measure could not pass congress, and the matter was dropped. Thus
did Lincoln, whose sympathy for the South never failed, make his last
effort to save for the slaveholders some portion of their property
which the progress of the age was going to take away.
POLITICAL PARTIES DURING THE CIVIL WAR
During the war the Northern voters became divided into four
classes, i. The regular republicans. They followed Lincoln in a
mild opposition to slavery, and put the preservation of
the union above all else. 2. The radical republicans,
also strong unionists, but in favor of an extreme anti-
slavery policy, and disposed to deal harshly with the South after the
war ended. 3. The war democrats, protesting their faith in demo-
cratic principles, but opposed to secession, and loyal to the union at the
polls and on the battlefield. They were not well organized as a
group, but in some cases were of great importance because they coop-
erated with the Lincoln republicans in important local elections.
4. The regular democrats, outwardly professing devotion to the
union, but criticizing the conduct of the war and undermining as much
as they could the national support of it. Many of the leaders of this
group were party men who wished to keep their organization intact,
and whose most evident means of reaching their end was to criticize
the party in power in whatever way offered. The first, second, and
third groups usually acted together on the all-important issue of the
war ; the fourth, always a minority in congress, made vigorous attacks
on their opponents, but were unable to modify the course of events.
To many people their efforts seemed little less than treason to the
union.
The first notable political contest after 1860 was in 1862. It was
a year of military reverses. McClellan did not take Richmond, and
Pope was beaten in Virginia. Grant's campaign from
Fort Henry to Corinth was a steady success, and Lee was p^eicWar
forced back from Maryland after Antietam, but after each criticized,
campaign came a period of inactivity. The war was
begun to crush the confederacy, and the people were discouraged
because this object seemed indefinitely distant. And so the democrats
— calling themselves conservatives — pronounced the war a costly
failure. The emancipation proclamation they also criticized. It was
arraigned as a violation of the constitution and as evidence that the
war was not waged to preserve the union but to destroy slavery.
Out of these two lines of argument was evolved the battle cry : The
constitution as it is and the union as it was !
Other arguments were found which did good service. Military
582 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
arrests began to be made as soon as the war began : they became
more numerous when campaign speakers fell to discussing the war
in candid terms. Stanton, who generally ordered the arrests, was
charged with doing so in order to suppress political dis-
cussion. In Ohio several men highly esteemed were thus
thrown into prison, and the political effect was great. The
vast expenditures for military supplies led to jobbery and corruption
on a large scale, as investigation committees in Washington clearly
showed, and out of this the democrats made capital. Moreover,
there was a natural reaction from the buoyant war feeling of 1861.
The result was seen in the elections of 1862. New York, Pennsyl-
vania, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin chose anti-
administration state officials, and the house of representatives,
which in 1861 had 42 democrats against 106 republicans and 28 union
men, had, two years later, 75 democrats against 102 republicans and
9 "border state men." Since the democrats were opposed to the
existing method of conducting the war, this meant that their policy
had gained materially in the house of representatives.
Within Lincoln's own party there was abundant trouble. The
radicals though him unequal to the presidency. Men of dignity
themselves, they could not tolerate his lack of informal-
*ty> carelessness in dress, and lack of method in business.
They thought him under the influence of Seward, who
was avowedly a conservative. Finally a caucus of republican sen-
ators in December, 1862, resolved that the president ought to dismiss
those members of the cabinet who interfered with the successful
conduct of the war. The blow was aimed at Seward, who offered his
resignation forthwith. In a joint meeting of the rest of the cabinet
and a committee of the senators, Lincoln cleverly forced Chase, who
was probably at the bottom of the discontent, to resign also. That
done, he refused to accept either resignation, and was able to continue
with a two-sided administration. Chase and the radicals were forced
to abate their opposition, but events showed that it was not extin-
guished.
Meanwhile, "Copperheads" appeared. The epithet was applied by
their enemies to all democrats ; but it should properly be given only
to those extreme opponents of the war who went so far as
heads1" to seem ^ their agitation to give aid to tne South. The
name came from the habit of wearing as a badge a button
cut out of a copper cent, on which was the head of the Goddess of
Liberty. The movement began late in 1862. It was accompanied
with violent speech-making, and one of its .most active leaders
was Clement L. Vallandigham, of Ohio, bold of speech and sharp of
tongue.
Arguments were not wanting to reach men bred in the school of
state rights. Congress had passed laws giving the president control
THE COPPERHEADS 583
over the sword and purse of the nation ; slavery was annulled
by a mere word; and hundreds of persons were in prison without
civil trial through military arrest, charged with no
other offense than words spoken against the government. 0frc"me"rts
The war was a republican war ; it would not have begun head°s!P<
but for the election of Lincoln, and it was now carried on,
said the agitators, to preserve the political power of the republicans.
In the winter of 1862-63, Napoleon III offered to mediate between
the North and the South. Lincoln's refusal to accept the offer was
declared evidence that the war was fought to subjugate a portion of
the American people.
After his defeat at Fredericksburg, Burnside became commander of
the department of the Ohio, where copperheads were most outspoken.
With a soldier's impatience of defiance, he issued an order,
April 13, 1863, in which he said, "the habit of declaring
sympathy for the enemy will not be allowed. . . ."
Vallandigham was then a candidate for the nomination
for governor of Ohio, and was making caustic speeches against the
republicans. He considered Burnside's order a challenge, and accepted
it. May i he made one of his customary speeches, although he
knew he was watched. Four days later he was arrested and sent
before a military commission which acted without forms of law.
He was pronounced guilty of "declaring disloyal sentiments" in order
to weaken the power of the government against its enemies, and the
sentence was confinement until the end of the war. Approved by
Burnside, it went at length to Lincoln, who commuted the penalty
to banishment to the confederacy. The prisoner was sent through
the union lines in Virginia, and reached Richmond. He was received
coldly by Jefferson Davis, and escaping through the blockade, arrived
safely in Canada, from which secure retreat he directed his campaign
in Ohio. Now a martyr in the eyes of his friends, he was nominated
for governor, and the immense public meetings which the democrats
held seemed to indicate certain triumph at the polls. The union
party was alarmed, and nominated B rough, a war democrat, to oppose
him. The election came in October, with the result that Brough
was chosen governor with a majority of 101,099. Probably the
victories at Gettysburg and Vicksburg, by showing that the war was
not a failure, were the chief cause of the unionist success. At the
same time, other states were carried by the friends of Lincoln with
large majorities, among them New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and
Indiana. These favorable results encouraged the republicans, and
the support of the war did not weaken.
This difficulty was hardly passed before the radicals began to show
that they wished to defeat the nomination of Lincoln for president in
1864. They united on Chase who, spite of the fact that he was in
the cabinet, showed that he desired the proffered honor. They
584 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
formed a committee with Senator Pomeroy, of Kansas, for
chairman, and early in 1864 it sent out a circular in behalf
of Chase. February 25, however, Chase's hopes
The fell when Ohio, his own state, declared for Lincoln.
CimUw-y ^e withdrew his countenance of the movement, but the
1864. radicals continued their opposition, their candidate now
being Fremont.
The convention of the national union, or the republican party, met
June 7. Four days earlier, Grant's bloody campaign against Lee
came to a halt in the costly sacrifice of life at Cold Harbor,
and Richmond was still in confederate hands. At the
nominated. -,..,.
same time, bnerman, after many days ot skirmishing and one
fierce battle at Kenesaw Mountain, was still outside of Atlanta.
To the North, it was the same old story of slaughter, expense, and
defeat; and the democratic press denounced bitterly a president
whose policy resulted only in such losses. But the convention was
true to Lincoln and nominated him unanimously. For vice-presi-
dent, it named Andrew Johnson, military governor of Tennessee.
Lincoln is said to have been responsible for the choice. There was a
strong feeling that a Southern man should be on the ticket, in order
to give it a non-sectional character. Lincoln, in his characteristic
way, said his own nomination came because the convention thought
"it was not best to swap horses while crossing the river." Now
followed weeks of utter gloom in the North. Unless the confederacy
could be crushed before the election, said Greeley, the union party
would be defeated. Prominent men declared that Lincoln ought to
withdraw, or be set aside for a stronger candidate. The president
himself thought his reelection doubtful, and wrote a memorandum
for his own use to the effect that if defeated be would cooperate with
his successor-elect to "save the union between the election and the
inauguration, as he will have secured his election on such grounds that
he cannot possibly save it afterwards."
The successor he had in mind was General McClellan, whom the
democrats nominated at Chicago in August. He was the strongest
candidate they could have selected, and he would surely
of Vw°n ke popular with the soldiers and the masses of the people.
The platform demanded the cessation of bloodshed and
the calling of a convention to restore peace "on the basis of the fed-
eral union^of the states." The stoutest hearted unionists feared the
result of a political campaign on this issue. Their apprehensions
were relieved when, on September 3, Sherman entered Atlanta, and
thus proved that, in one of its most important movements, the war was
not a failure. It was an argument the democrats could not answer ;
and cheered by it the union men took up the campaign with such
spirit that Lincoln, in November, was successful by 212 electoral
votes to McClellan's 21.
BROAD PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY 585
It is a noteworthy thing that in the remarkable days of the civil
war the man elected president in 1864 by a vote so sweeping was,
at the same time, at variance with a majority of each
house of congress on the most important civil question
then before the public, i.e. the reconstruction of the
Southern states. Throughout this last winter of war the two fac-
tions subordinated their quarrel to the task of conquering the South ;
but no one doubted that, this accomplished, a great struggle would
occur between the president and the radicals to determine who should
dominate in reconstruction. From this conflict Lincoln was saved
by Booth's wicked deed.
THE WAR POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT
The constitution provides that congress shall have power to declare
war and suppress insurrections. The war of 1812 began with a decla-
ration by congress. The Mexican war began with a
declaration by Polk that Mexico had begun war by
sending troops into the territory of the United States,
To many people it seemed at the time a dangerous thing
to allow the president to determine, when another nation had begun
war, since to do so was tantamount to giving him the power to
declare war. In 1861 the situation was even more urgent. That
congress, called to meet in July, would recognize the existence of in-
surrection, was not doubted. To meet the active war measures of
the confederacy, prompt action on the part of the union was neces-
sary. Should Lincoln wait for the authority of acts of congress?
He was too practical a man for such a course, and boldly decided to
assume that he had necessary powers, and trust that congress would
by its approval legalize what he had done. He accordingly called
for troops, organized armies, and proclaimed a blockade of Southern
ports. In doing so he established a precedent for similar situations,
if such should arise in the future.
A more doubtful matter was connected with the suspension of the
writ of habeas corpus. On this subject the constitution only says,
"The writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless
when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety Suspending
may require it." But the constitution did not say whether ^abea™* (
the president or congress should suspend the writ. Here corpus,
again the necessity for immediate action was apparent.
Maryland was full of Southern sentiment, the legislature was called
to meet to consider the situation, and it was believed that a majority
of its members would favor secession. If the state joined the con-
federacy, Washington would be isolated and the cause of union would
be severely injured. Lincoln again assumed responsibility. He
ordered the military authorities to arrest the members of the legis-
586 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
lature who seemed to be plotting treason, and to hold them pris-
oners without benefit of habeas corpus. From their prisons they
appealed to Taney, chief justice, who readily decided that they had
committed no crime against the civil law. But they were not released,
and there was no power in the courts to force the executive to adopt
Taney 's construction of the constitution. This action also became
a precedent under which, we may believe, it will be held that in a
future emergency the president may suspend the writ if he thinks the
public safety demands it. In this, as in all other cases, he is subject
to impeachment for exercising his power without a due sense of
responsibility. As Professor Dunning well says, it made the presi-
dent a temporary dictator.
Military arrests, however, were not confined to Maryland. In
all parts of the North men were imprisoned on the charge of aiding
the South. September 24, 1862, Lincoln issued a procla-
mation for the arrest of persons discouraging enlistment
Arrest? or resisting the draft. They were to be tried by military
courts, and to prevent the interference of civil officers they
were to be denied the privileges of habeas corpus. This step was
defended on the ground of military necessity. It placed for the time
being the life and liberty of citizens in the hands of the president
to an extent that was never contemplated in the much decried alien
and sedition laws of 1798. Under it, numerous arrests were made, and
the victims were frequently kept in duress without trial. So great
was the popular disapproval that congress, March 3, 1863, attempted
to regulate the matter. It gave the president the authority to sus-
pend the writ, ordered that persons then in prison should be discharged
unless they were indicted by a grand jury, and that in
Habeas ^ future no arrested one should be held longer than
of°i863. twenty days unless so indicted. The natural consequence
was to take such cases out of the hands of the military
courts and leave them with the federal courts. Spite of this act
military arrests of civilians continued to the end of the war, though
not in as large numbers as formerly. The civil courts were not able
to assert their authority against commanders of the army and were
forced to submit. It was not until 1866 that they found an oppor-
tunity to declare themselves in the decision of the case ex parte Milli-
gan (see page 612). Although the supreme court here asserted the
supremacy of the civil arm in districts not immediately subject to mili-
tary authority, it is difficult to see how its contention could be enforced
if the country should again have to encounter a situation like that of the
civil war.
THE SOUTHERN PROBLEM AND SOUTHERN EFFORTS
It is regrettable that this work is not large enough to embrace a de-
scription of the civil war from the southern side. Nothing in American
THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT 587
history is finer than the ability and devotion with which the confed-
eracy, once it was organized, met its difficulties and utilized its scant
resources to beat off the armies that were thrown upon it. Here it is
only possible to mention the most prominent facts and to show how
they affected the struggle.
The confederate constitution was the old constitution modified to
remedy what the South thought were bad interpretations of the old
instrument. Internal improvements and protective tariffs
were forbidden, slavery -was guaranteed in territories, a constitution
confederate official serving solely within a state might be
impeached by a two-thirds vote of each house of the legislature within
that state, and a two-thirds vote of each house was made necessary for
admitting a new state into the confederacy, the vote in the senate
being by states. In these particulars, each of which suggests old
points of dispute, it was attempted to guard the rights of the state
against the central authority. Several other features are noteworthy.
In order to make it easy to modify the constitution in keeping with
the changing needs of the country, a new convention must be called
when demanded by three states. Another feature took from the state
the right to enfranchise foreigners who had not been naturalized, and
still another made the president's term of office six years with ineligibil-
ity for reelection. Cabinet members were to appear and speak in
congress on matters pertaining to their departments, but they could
not vote ; and no money was to be appropriated without a two-thirds
vote except the sums specified in annual estimates by the departments.
Several of these latter features had no reference to the sectional con-
troversy, but were considered improvements warranted by experience.
The Montgomery government was provisional and was to exist for
one year only. By autumn the permanent constitution was adopted,
and elections were held for presidential electors and members of con-
gress. In the former Jefferson Davis was elected president for six
years, and February 22, 1862, he was inaugurated in a downpour of
rain which caused the superstitious to tremble for the fate of the new
government. In fact, trouble soon appeared. Davis was a man of
strong will and little tact. He was a West Point graduate, and took
effective control of the war policy. He dominated a cabinet and con-
gress hardly equal to the great work thrown upon them. His plan to
withhold cotton from Europe in the first year of the war, when the
blockade was not very efficient, was condemned by many planters.
His military appointments were supposed to be due to favoritism ; it
was said that he showed too strong a preference for Virginians, and
some of the states claimed that he overrode states' rights in executing
the conscription laws and the laws to impress horses and supplies for
the army. Before the end of the war the discontented class was large,
and one heard in many quarters that it was "a rich man's war and a
poor man's fight." But in most respects Davis had his way ; and it is
588 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
doubtful if any other Southerner then in public life could have filled his
difficult position so well. The chief objection to him as president is
that he was too stout-hearted, and that he allowed the war to continue
too long after it was an evident failure. In the light of later events it(
would have been better if in the autumn of 1864 he had relaxed his
stubborn purpose to resist until death, sacrificing his own ideas for
what he should have known was the interest of his people.
As the hope of success retreated, a peace party began to appear,
most of its members being those who had clung longest to the union
, in 1 86 1. Davis and the whole confederate government
Movement. oPPose(i ^ strongly, the writ of habeas corpus was suspended,
and every effort was made to keep alive the loyalty of all
the people. In North Carolina and Georgia the peace movement was
strongest, and even Stephens, the vice-president, was known to look
upon it with favor. The elections of 1864 were awaited as a test of the
matter, but they resulted in victory for the friends of resistance, and
the two states held on to the cause, though it was evidently desperate.
Turning from internal affairs in the South, let us consider foreign
relations. Although selling bonds and buying supplies and ships con-
cerned confederate agents in Europe, they gave most atten-
Fore^n61^6 tion to e^orts to secure the recognition of their govern-
Affairs. merit. The decision of England in May, 1861, to give the
South only the status of belligerency was disappointing, but
hopes ran strong that confederate military success would be followed
by recognition. Time showed that this was a vain expectation.
The campaigns of Bull Run, the Peninsula, and second Manassas
were confederate victories, and though Antietam was a practical
reverse, Fredericksburg was a decisive victory, and spite of them no
signs of recognition appeared. In fact, England steadily refused to
recognize the confederate representative, Mason, and he reported
that regard for the dignity of his government demand that he be re-
called. He was, however, instructed to remain at his post in the hope
that he might influence public opinion. He spent money freely for news-
paper articles, and a newspaper was established in London presenting
to the British public facts and arguments favorable to the South.
By this time England was trying hard to produce cotton in her colonies
and succeeding, although the quality of the cotton thus secured was
below that produced in the South. The British people were strongly
opposed to slavery, and Adams, the American minister, lost no oppor-
tunity to show them to what extent the cause of the South was con-
nected with the prolongation of the institution. It is not too much to
say that slavery alone stood in the way of European recognition of the
confederacy. After the battle of Gettysburg and the fall of Vicksburg,
recognition became impossible, and Mason withdrew from London
to Paris, remaining in Europe until the end of the war, with little
to do.
GOOD WILL OF NAPOLEON III
589
Meanwhile, it seemed for a time that better success would come
from negotiations with France. Napoleon III wished to revive the
French colonial empire, and Mexico seemed to offer a favor-
able field of action. In order to collect some debts which
this improvident country had failed to pay, a joint French,
British, and Spanish expedition occupied it in 1861-1862. Mexico
now came to terms in regard to the debts, and England and Spain with-
drew. But the French troops remained, and Napoleon, by taking
sides with one of the two political factions then in the country, soon
made himself lord of the country. Setting aside all pretext, he boldly
began to inaugurate his colonial scheme. He expected no embarrass-
ment on account of our Monroe doctrine ; for the United States gov-
ernment had its hands full at home. On the contrary, he was disposed
to make a friend of the confederacy. He caused the confederates to
believe that early recognition was inevitable, and said he only awaited
England's initiative. Early in 1862 he said he was ready to open the
blockade of New Orleans, but the place was taken by Farragut, and the
plan became impossible. Late in the same year he sug-
gested joint intervention by himself, England, and Spain, J£*1£enand
with an armistice of six months to arrange for a permanent federacy.
peace. The proposition was rejected by England and
brought forth a firm protest from the United States, with the result
that it accomplished nothing for the confederacy. But France did
not cease to countenance the confederacy. Napoleon even sanctioned
the building of heavy corvettes of the Alabama type provided they could
go to sea without their destinations becoming known. Work on the
ships was begun, but the American minister learned of it and protested
to the emperor, who forthwith revoked the permission he had given.
The ships, six in all, were completed, but Gettysburg had then been
fought, and it was impossible to get permission for their departure un-
less they were sold to a neutral power of recognized standing. One
of them was sold fictitiously to Denmark, got to sea, where her name
was changed to the Stonewall, but it was not done until January,
1865, and although the vessel reached Havana, it was too late to be of
service to the confederacy. The action of France in refusing permis-
sion for the ships to depart came just at the time the British authorities
took similar action in regard to the confederate rams built in English
waters (see page 523), and the fate of the much desired confederate
navy was thus sealed. Cut off from activity on the sea, the confed-
eracy could not raise the blockade, and the war was left to be fought
out on land. Of the ships which the South managed to get armed and
on the sea, the most notable were the Alabama, Florida, Sumter,Shenan-
doah, Tallahassee, and Georgia.
The Southern army was first raised by volunteering, as in the North ;
but although enthusiasm was abundant in 1861, it soon was in-
adequate for the demands of the hour, and in April, 1862, a conscription
5QO CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
act was passed, making all males between the ages of 18 and 35 liable
to military duty. Five months later the limits were made 18 and 45,
and before the end of the war boys as young as 16 years
Southern wcre mac^e n'able to service. The confederate historians
Armies"1 Place tne aggre£ate number of troops in their armies at
600,000 to 700,000. The northern authorities contend that
this is too small, and think about 1,000,000 the right number. Un-
fortunately, the confederate records were lost, and the dispute cannot
be decided. The white population of the confederacy was only
5,500,000, which, by the accepted method of estimating the available
military class as one-fifth of the population, would give 1,100,000 of
military age. It is hardly to be expected that nearly all of these were
drawn into the army. In the North the men of military age were
about 4,400,000, of which about 2,500,000 went into the army.
The conscription laws of the South produced the same evils as in the
North. Substitutes were allowed, 'and substitute brokers appeared.
The men thus furnished were considered inefficient soldiers, and de-
serted freely. Men of this class, as well as those who evaded service,
frequently fled to the woods and became the scourge of peaceful com-
munities. In the last months of the war there was much complaint on
this score. As the Southern armies were reduced in
numbers, surgeons went everywhere, examining the
men not in the armies, and taking all who could be of any
use as soldiers. In this way the confederate government brought
out a very large proportion of the men capable of fighting in its behalf.
By Christmas, 1864, it was estimated by the authorities that there
were 100,000 deserters in the South.
The financial resources of the confederacy were also severely taxed.
The strictness of the blockade reduced import duties to an inconsider-
able basis, and the chief source of funds was loans and in-
ternal taxes. The former consisted of bonds and treasury
notes, issued both by states and the confederacy. Specie
was chiefly sent abroad to pay for public supplies, and the rapidly
depreciating paper money sank in value until it was only received at
enormous reduction. Even towns, counties, insurance companies,
and mining companies issued their promises to pay. Before the end
of the war the notes of the confederacy alone were more than
$1,000,000,000. Produce loans were resorted to, i.e. bonds were
given in exchange for cotton, tobacco, and turpentine, which might
be sent abroad on blockade runners, or which, stored against the day
of victory, might serve as security for loans floated in Europe. Finally,
a tithe of agricultural products was required for the support of the
armies. The slaves, although not used as soldiers, furnished by their
labor the food which supported the armies. When the confederacy
collapsed the South contained enough food supplies to support the
struggle for a much longer period.
"KING COTTON'S" WEAKNESS 591
Before the war the South had very few manufactures, and though
strenuous efforts were now made to repair the deficiency, the lack of
machinery and trained operatives presented insurmount-
able difficulties. Shoes, clothing, paper, hats, and a thou- Manu-
sand other articles were very hard to obtain. The blockade
kept out foreign supplies, and the small amount that got through on
the swift blockade runners sold at exorbitant prices. Coffee and
tea became almost unknown, and many substitutes were invented.
For sugar, sorghum was used. Medicines were also obtained with
difficulty, especially quinine, which was much needed on account of the
prevalent malaria. Spite of such privations the spirits of the people
were good ; for there was always confidence that victory would soon
come and that the rigorous blockade would be raised.
Railroads could not be repaired, and were not able to carry supplies
from the rich fields of the Gulf states to the army in Virginia. Man-
ufactured articles such as there were could not be dis- R „
tributed to the people on the farms. Machine shops,
which might have worked for the repair of railroads, ran to their full
capacity on material of war. In despair the government offered aid
to the railroads, but there were not in the South the necessary iron mills
to produce the means of keeping up or extending railroad service.
There were rich beds of iron ore in the South, but in the devotion of the
people to agriculture they had been unworked, and it was impossible
to develop them under pressure of war.
Before 1861 a favorite secession argument was "Cotton is King !"
and it did much for the cause of secession. In substance it was that
Europe and the manufacturing North were so dependent
on Southern cotton that war was very improbable, and if it £j^e *^J
did come, so much suffering would occur in England that cotton,
she would interfere to end the struggle. It is true that
the business interests of the North deprecated war, but they were
swept away by the rising of patriotic fervor which followed the at-
tack on Sumter, and from that time this part of the cotton kingdom
paid no attention to the " King." In England there was much suffer-
ing, the small supply of cotton that went out through the blockade
counting for nothing in the situation. But the people of England dis-
liked slavery too much to take its part, and endured financial loss until
slavery could be wiped out of its last important stronghold. Under
these conditions, cotton, which early in 1861 brought 14 cents a pound
in Liverpool, sold at the end of the war for 50 cents in the same place.
Great quantities of it accumulated in the South, spite of the efforts of
the confederate congress to induce the planters to raise food products
only. In 1861 appeals were made to the planters by the government
to burn their cotton lest it be sent abroad and relieve the scarcity, and
1,000,000 bales are said to have been thus destroyed. When New
Orleans fell, the federal authorities offered to allow cotton from the
592 CIVIL AFFAIRS DURING THE WAR
interior to pass out, but very little appeared for that purpose. By the
end of 1862 the confederate authorities changed their opinion and
sought to send cotton out through the blockade in order to get sup-
plies. But at this time the blockade was too rigid to allow a consider-
able exportation. Trade between the lines was ordinarily forbidden,
but when west Tennessee was occupied a demoralizing trade sprang
up which the strictest orders did not prevent. Cotton was given in
exchange for salt, clothing, and even military supplies, and there
were many complaints that officers of the posts shared the profits.
General Butler, who commanded at New Orleans from May to Decem-
ber, 1862, and at Norfolk in 1864, was generally believed to have
reaped handsome reward by conniving at a trade in which cotton ex-
changed for salt and other supplies at 15 cents a pound sold in the
North for 60 cents.
One of the most exciting phases of the war in the South was block-
ade running. The low price of cotton within the confederacy, and
the high price without, made it a practice as profitable as
Running6 adventurous. A ship which could make two or three trips
successfully netted a handsome return to her owners if
she were captured afterwards. For the service, vessels of great speed
were used. They were low, rakish -looking craft, painted as nearly the
color of the water as possible, and were usually manned by foreigners,
who, if captured, were not prisoners of war. Coming back, they
managed to reach the bar of the home port at high tide on a dark
night and tried to steal unobserved between the sentinel ships that
guarded the entrance. If discovered, they tried to dart between the
blockaders, and sometimes succeeded by reason of their speed. Block-
ade runners were usually required to carry a portion of their incoming
cargoes for the account of the confederate government. Nassau and
Havana were the favorite ports to which they ran, and Wilmington,
North Carolina, and Charleston the best ports from which to escape.
The former is protected by shoals stretching far out to sea, which
made the work of the blockaders difficult. It remained open until
Fort Fisher, which guarded the entrance, was taken, January 16,
1865.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For civil affairs during the war, the same general works are suggested as for
military affairs (see page 543). But the same cannot be said in regard to sources.
In this respect one must rely on : The Congressional Globe, for debates in congress ;
The Statutes at Large, for laws passed ; and the Executive Documents for reports of
committees or of high officials. Especially important are the reports of the Joint
Committee on the Conduct of the War, in 8 vols. The United States government
has published the journals of the confederate congress, and Richardson, Messages
and Papers of the Confederacy, 2 vols. (1905), contains some of the documents to which
the title directs attention. The Confederate Statutes at Large, published contem-
poraneously at Richmond, contains all the confederate laws but those of the last
days of the government. See also : Moore, Rebellion Records, 12 vols. (1861-1868),
much information culled from newspapers, pamphlets, and public speeches; and
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 593
Appleton's Annual Cyclopedia. Of the newspapers of the times the following are im-
portant : The Tribune, Herald, Times, and Evening Post, of New York ; the Journal
and Advertiser of Boston ; the Times and Tribune, of Chicago ; the Republican, of
Springfield, Mass. ; the Democrat, of La Crosse, Wisconsin ; the Examiner, Whig,
and Dispatch, of Richmond ; the Mercury, of Charleston ; and the Picayune, of New
Orleans.
The memoirs and lives of the prominent politicians of the period yield much im-
portant information. The most important are: Nicolay and Hay, Abraham
Lincoln, a History, 10 vols. (1890), very important; Bancroft, Life of William H.
Seward, 2 vols. (1900), a scholarly work ; John Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years
(1895) ; Adams, Charles Francis Adams (1900) ; Pierce, Charles Sumner, 4 vols.
(1877-1893); Greeley, Recollections of a Busy Life (1868); Julian, Recollections of
War Times (1884); Gorham, Edwin M. Stanton, 2 vols. (1899); McCall, Thad-
deus Stevens (1899) ; Blaine, Twenty Years in Congress, 2 vols. (1884) ; Hart,
Salmon P. Chase (1899) ; Coleman, John J. Crittenden (1871) ; McClure, Lincoln
and Men of War Times (1892) ; McCulloch, Men and Measures (1000) ; Fessenden,
Life of W. P. Fessenden, 2 vols. (1907) ; Mrs. Davis, Je/erson Davis (1890) ; Dodd,
Life of Je/erson Davis (1907) ; Cleveland, Alexander H. Stephens (1866) ; Stovall,
Robert Toombs (1892) ; Du Bose, Life of William L. Yancey (1892) ; Capers, Life
and Times of C. G. Memminger (1893); and Woodbum, Thaddeus Stevens (1913).
On the meaning of the constitution as regards the issues brought up by the war
see : Parker, Constitutional Law with Reference to the Present Condition of the United
States (1862), refers especially to military arrests; Alexander Johnston, American
Political History, 1763-1876, 2 vols. (1905), collected from Labor's Cyclopedia by
Professor Woodburn; Dunning, Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction (ed.
1904) ; Whiting, War Powers of the Government (1864) ; Von Hoist, Constitutional
History of the United States, 8 vols. trans. (1876-1892) ; Wilson, Political Measures of
the United States Congress (1866) ; and Binney, Privileges of a Writ of Habeas
Corpus (1865). On the southern side, see Davis, Rise and Fall of the Confederate
Government, 2 vols. (1881) ; Stephens, Constitutional View of the War between the
States, 2 vols. (1868-1870) ; and Curry, Civil History of the Confederate Government
(1901).
On the support of the war see : Dewey, Financial History of the United States
(1903) ; Knox, American Notes (1899) ; Stille, How a Free People Conduct a Long
War (1863) ; Stan wood, American Tariff Controversies, 2 vols. (1903) ; Sumner, Ameri-
can Currency (1874) ; Oberholtzer, Jay Cooke, 2 vols. (1907) ; Schwab, Confederate
States of America, Financial and Industrial (1901) ; and Fleming, Reconstruction in
Alabama (1905). On numbers and losses: Livermore, Numbers and Losses of the
Civil War (1901) ; Fox, Regimental Losses in the Civil War (1889) ; and Wood, The
Confederate Handbook (1900).
On diplomatic relations: Moore, Digest of International Law, 8 vols. (1906);
Wharton, Digest of International Law of the United States (1886) ; Adams, Charles
Francis Adams (1900) ; Bancroft, William H. Seward, 2 vols. (1900) ; Bigelow,
France and the Confederate Navy (1888) ; Bulloch, Secret Service of the Confederate
States, 2 vols. (1884) ; Callahan, Diplomatic History of the Southern Confederacy
(1901) ; and Bonham, British Consuls in the Confederacy (Columbia Studies, 1911).
For Independent Reading
Tarbell, Life of Lincoln, 2 vols. (ed. 1900) ; McClure, Lincoln and Men of War
Times (1892) ; Adams, Charles Francis Adams (1900) ; Hart, Salmon P. Chase (1899) ;
Riddle, Recollections of War Times (1895); Dodd, Life of Je/erson Davis (1907);
Russell, My Diary North and South (1862) ; and R. E. Lee, Jr., Recollections and
Letters of R. E. Lee (1904).
2Q
CHAPTER XXVIII
RECONSTRUCTION— THE NATIONAL SIDE
Two POSSIBLE METHODS OF RECONSTRUCTION
THE constitution did not provide a way to restore government
in a conquered state, and the men of 1865 must use ingenuity and find
one. Congress thought restoration a part of the law-
Presidental making function and wished to act the part of restorer.
aiessional Tlie President ^elt tnat ^ was within his authority as
RecSons?ruc- commander-in-chief of the army and navy. He could
tion. establish military law, and he could say on what con-
ditions he would withdraw it. But he did not presume
to create reconstruction. His theory was that it was an outgrowth of
a latent power in the state which sprang into active life when he with-
drew the military force which held it back. In the nature of the case,
the president could act first. He thus began actual reconstruction,
but in 1867 congress took it out of his hands, overthrew all he had done,
and established a reconstruction of its own. Thus we have presiden-
tial and congressional reconstruction.
The point of difference lay in the amount of confidence which could
be reposed in the South to accept emancipation and allow the freedmen
complete civil rights. The president would trust the
The Southerners. Let the union take some fundamental
Between06 guarantees, exclude for a time the leading secessionists
Them. from a share in government, and leave the future to the
calm sense and honor of the South. Congress thought
this was not enough. It feared that when the oversight of freedmen
was remanded to the states, local laws would be passed undoing much
of the good accomplished by the war. It demanded laws and constitu-
tional amendments limiting state action and protecting the rights of
the freedmen. Its program developed as it gained control of the
situation, and it finally announced a definite demand for enfranchise-
ment as the only sure means by which the ex-slave could defend him-
self against the Southern white men. Several important laws'and two
constitutional amendments expressed this program. Their enact-
ment marked the triumph of congress over the president.
In the long debates by which congress came to its decision were
594
THEORIES OF STATUS 595
announced five theories of the status of the Southern states, i. The
Southerners themselves believed that the states existed with un-
impaired vitality, and that they only needed to accept
the national authority and elect senators and representa-
tives in order to resume their former places in the union, states6"
This was consistent with the ancient theory of state rights.
2. The presidential theory held that the states were still existent,
but were incapable of normal action because their officers were insur-
gents. It announced that when the president pardoned these officials
the old status returned, and the people could form a government, act
for the state, and resume representation in congress. In each of these
theories was the idea that a state is indestructible. 3. Sumner
believed that a state resisting the union committed treason, forfeited
its constitutional rights, and destroyed itself as effectively as if it
committed suicide. If the state no longer existed, the people living in
what had been its borders were entirely under the national authority,
and congress might dictate the terms on which the state could be
restored. Sumner was supported by many able men, and his theory
was in line with the doctrine of strong nationality to which the war
gave a decided impulse. 4. Thaddeus Stevens, able leader of the house
of representatives, and more severe toward the South than Senator
Sumner, believed also that the states as such had ceased to exist;
but he considered them conquered provinces, as truly as if the war had
been against a foreign power. They were, therefore, entirely in the
hands of the conqueror, and congress might do what it would with the
people and the territory concerned. Stevens thought the South,
having rejected the constitution, had no right to claim its protection.
He was known to favor drastic measures before completing the work
of reconstruction. 5. As men considered these views, they found ob-
jections in each. To allow easy restoration of the states, as was im-
plied in the first and second, would imperil the fruits of the war. On
the other hand, to recognize the state-suicide or the conquered-prov-
inces theory implied a relinquishment of the powers of states, and a
strengthening of the national power to which a large part of congress
would not consent. In this dilemma the men of the day found another
course of action which was believed to avoid each disadvantage. The
compromise, not entirely consistent, was expressed in the forfeited-
rights theory. It held that secession did not destroy the states or
even take them out of the union, but that it deprived them of some of
their normal rights. They were in a state of suspended animation,
and congress was to determine the terms of restoration. The theory
differed chiefly from Sumner's by insisting that the states still existed,
but with power and rights suspended, and from the presidential
theory, by leaving the task of reconstruction entirely to congress.
It took many months of debating to bring this theory to its pre-
dominance.
596 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
LINCOLN'S PLAN or RECONSTRUCTION
By the end of 1862 parts of Tennessee, Arkansas, and Louisiana
were recovered from the confederacy and taken at once under the
. direction of the generals who conquered them. Order
Government was Preserved by the commanders of military posts and by
local officers appointed by the commanding generals.
But this was not the proper function of an officer commanding in the
field, and Lincoln created military governors with powers derived from
himself as commander-in-chief. They appointed local officers, es-
tablished courts, and supervised the police function in their respective
jurisdictions. They could be removed by the president, and were
considered but a temporary makeshift. Lincoln disliked military
government as much as the people, and desired to make it yield as
quickly as possible to a government which rested on the consent of the
governed. Peirpoint's rump government at Alexandria served for the
parts of Virginia held by the union, and relieved Lincoln of the neces-
sity of establishing military government in that state.
December 8, 1863, Lincoln announced his plan in a "Procla-
mation of Amnesty and Reconstruction." He offered pardon
to all but certain excepted citizens of the South, if they
The would swear loyalty to the union and accept the recent
Amnesty Jaws and proclamations respecting slavery. The persons
tion of excluded from pardon were former confederate civil and
1863. diplomatic officers, men who resigned federal judgeships,
positions in the army or navy of the union, or seats in
congress in order to serve the confederacy, officers above the rank of
colonel in the army and lieutenant in the navy of the confederacy, and
persons who refused to treat as prisoners of war captured colored
troops and their white officers. He hoped that the mass of whites in
the recovered areas would take the oath, and he thought it wise to
neutralize, for the time being, the influence of their former leaders by
excluding them from participation in the work of reorganization. The
proclamation also announced that when a number of citizens of a state
equal to one- tenth of the vote of that state in 1860 had taken the pre-
scribed oath, they might establish a civil government, and presidential
support would be given to its measures to regulate the life of the f reed-
men, provided emancipation was recognized. Finally, it was specifi-
cally stated that the president had no authority over the readmission
of senators and representatives to the national congress.
In this proclamation Lincoln spoke in general terms and with his
usual caution ; but his intention is seen specifically in the plan he im-
mediately put into operation in Louisiana, where thirteen parishes,
including New Orleans, were in union hands. In August, 1862,
he appointed General Shepley military governor of the state, and in
THE LOUISIANA PLAN 597
December, befoje the proclamation appeared, two districts elected
congressmen who were allowed seats in the house, although the
radicals there opposed the step because they thought it
should wait until a general plan of reconstruction was Reconstruc-
adopted by congress. Lincoln ignored the radicals, and J^*?^ _
after the proclamation was issued, encouraged General 1863-1864.
Banks, commanding in Louisiana, to order an election for
state officials on February 22,1 864. This done, a state convention was
called to adapt the Louisiana constitution to new conditions. Three
parties now appeared : one was conservatively Southern and declared
that slavery continued spite of the emancipation proclamation of 1863 ;
another was Northern in feeling and thought that slavery still existed,
but should be abolished by state action ; a third, including the practical
men generally, thought slavery no longer existent. In the February elec-
tions, the third party cast more votes than the other two combined.
It chose Michael Hahn governor, with other civil officers, but the
second party protested the election as under military influence, and
won the support of the radicals in congress, so that the senators, and
representatives chosen with Hahn were not seated when they appeared
in Washington. But the third party proceeded with its program. The
convention met in April and revised the constitution by abolishing
slavery, providing for public education without distinction of race,
and granting equal civil status to all male citizens. This constitution
was submitted to the people and adopted by a vote of 6836 to 1556.
Lincoln supported Hahn ; but radicals, in close touch with the Northern
group in Louisiana, opposed all that was done, declaring especially for
negro suffrage. Lincoln did not favor so extreme a step. "I barely
suggest, for your private consideration," he wrote to Governor Hahn,
" whether some of the colored people may not be let in — as, for in-
stance, the very intelligent, and especially those who have fought
gallantly in our ranks. They would probably help, in some trying
time to come, to keep the jewel of liberty within the family of free-
dom." When negro suffrage became a most serious question, the war
president was dead, but there is no reason to believe that
he ever changed the opinion he expressed on it in 1864. Statgg
In the same year, Arkansas established a reconstructed
government like that of Louisiana, and Tennessee did the same in the
winter of 1864-1865 ; but congress refused to seat the members chosen
from either state. In 1862 a military governor was appointed over
the small strip recovered in the east of North Carolina, but the
process of reconquest was stayed, and no attempt was made to es-
tablish civil government in that state until the war ended.
Lincoln's plan aroused enthusiasm in the North, where there was
little popular desire to punish the South. Then the radical leaders
became alarmed and bethought themselves to check the tide of opin-
ion which set for him. They thought him too mild toward the South ;
598 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
some of them favored negro suffrage, and they wer£ shrewd enough
to utilize the jealousy congress felt for its privilege as the part of the
government which ought to decide upon reconstruction.
^ne h°use °f representatives was under their control, and in
December, 1863, appointed a committee, Henry Winter
Davis, of Maryland, chairman, to report a plan of reconstruction. The
bill he introduced was carried through the house. It was amended in
the senate and passed there chiefly through the efforts of Wade, of
Ohio. For this reason it was called the Wade-Davis bill, after its two
most notable authors. It provided that provisional governors ad-
minister the affairs of the recovered Southern states until the war ended,
and that civil government should then be reestablished, when half of
the male white citizens took an oath of loyalty to the union. The work
of restoration should be done by a state convention, for which no man
should vote and in which no man should have a seat who had held
state or central office under the confederacy, or voluntarily fought
against the union. This state convention must amend the constitu-
tion so as to provide: (i) that confederate officials, except in offices
merely administrative and in military rank below colonel, should not
vote for, or be, governors or members of legislatures ; (2) that slavery
be forever prohibited; and (3) that all debts incurred in behalf of the
confederacy should be repudiated. When this constitution had been
ratified by the people, the state was to be allowed representation in
congress. The Wade-Davis bill passed July 2, 1864, two days before
congress adjourned.
Although the bill was milder than the plan later carried out by con-
gress, it was too severe for Lincoln, and it received a "pocket veto."
He said, referring to repeated declarations made early in
vetoP»cket the war: "I do not see how any of us can now deny or
contradict what we have always said, that congress has no
constitutional power over slavery in the states." Reissued a proc-
lamation in which he said he would not bind himself to only one form
of reconstruction, but that if any state •presented itself for restoration
under the plan in the Wade-Davis bill, it would have his support.
This angered the radicals, who published an ill-tempered manifesto
charging the president with a design to "hold the electoral votes of the
rebel states at the dictation of his personal ambition." The war was
then drawing to an end, and the problems of reconstructions were by
common consent deferred until they could be taken up with an assur-
ance of final settlement.
The president and congress were now clearly at odds,
" Twenty- and the latter showed their distrust by passing a resolution
Joi^t"1 that the electoral v°tes of the states restored under Lin-
Rule." coin's plan should not be counted. They also passed the
"Twenty-second Joint Rule," by which the consent of
each house was necessary to count the disputed electoral vote of a state.
JOHNSON'S CHARACTER 599
It gave the radicals a strong grip on the presidential elections, and
remained in force until 1876, when it was dropped because the demo-
crats controlled the house. Lincoln was too wise to' oppose these res-
olutions openly. He realized that a contest awaited him in which
he would need all powers of tact and persuasion. Ere the encounter
began he was dead.
One of his last victories was the approval of the thirteenth amend-
ment by congress, February i, 1865. It was accepted by three-fourths
of the states and formally proclaimed December 18, 1865.
It read: "i. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, j^.teenth
except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall Amendment,
have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United
States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. 2. Congress shall
have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." The
debate on the amendment in congress shows that "involuntary servi-
tude" was meant to include any partially free condition, as serfdom
or peonage. The term "any place subject to their jurisdiction" was
adopted in preference to the term " United States," lest the latter be
held to mean only the states within the union. The second clause
caused much anxiety. As adopted, it was supposed to give congress
ample power to overrule any obstruction of the states.
JOHNSON'S PLAN or RECONSTRUCTION
The man who took up the task which tried Lincoln was also humbly
born and self-educated. A tailor by trade, he lacked the advantage
most of our self-made leaders have had, of a long training
in some conservative and intellectual profession. His *™Tew
^ . . ,j * m Johnson,
power was won in the mountain counties of Tennessee,
where he appealed to passions rather than judgment. He voiced
boldly and ably the non-slaveholder's sense of inequality at the hands
of the planter and his hope in the union as the salvation of the South
from aristocratic domination. Lincoln admired his courage, and
made him in 1862 military governor of Tennessee, a position in which
a man of decision and inflexible will was needed. Lincoln also urged
him for vice-presidential candidate in 1864, because he wanted a
Southern man on the ticket. He was a democrat before the war,
and still believed in state sovereignty. He became a republican be-
cause he loved the union, and was now, the union no longer in danger,
inclined to revert to his .old position. He was frequently intoxicated,
and in that condition was liable to make maudlin speeches in which
were mingled abuse of his opponents and glorification of himself.
These lapses occurred most frequently in the first year of his presi-
dency. Later, in the stress of conflict, he manifested more self-control,
and waged his battle cautiously and with clearness of mind. But his
opponents were shrewd and unrelenting. His indiscretions were de-
6oo RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
scribed in the press and on the stump, and in the excitement of the
moment he was presented to the world as a vulgar man gone mad.
Johnson took the oath of office on April 15. He retained Lincoln's
cabinet, in which were two factions, one headed by Stanton, secretary
of war, and in sympathy with the radicals, and the other
Johnson, m favor of Lincoln's milder policy. In this second group
Seward.' *" Seward, secretary of state, was now greatest, but, wounded
when Lincoln was shot, it was not until May 19 that he
was able to attend cabinet meetings. At first the president acted
with Stanton, who stimulated his natural resentment against the
ruling class in the South. He talked much about making treason
odious, and he offered large rewards for the arrest of Jefferson Davis
and other confederates on the ground that they took part in the con-
spiracy to kill Lincoln. The radicals even urged the capture and
punishment of Lee and other paroled generals, on the ground that
paroles were ineffective at the end of the state of war. At this, General
Grant, who granted Lee's parole, intervened with so strong a negative
that the project was relinquished. Its violence reacted against Stanton,
and the opportune reappearance of Seward caused pacific ideas to pre-
vail. By June i, Johnson's policy was essentially that of Lincoln.
Johnson's plan appeared in his amnesty proclamation, May 29,
1865. All former confederates, except those specifically excluded,
were to be pardoned upon taking an oath of loyalty. The
Amnest* S exceptions included confederate, civil, and diplomatic
officers, military officers above colonels, naval officers
above lieutenants, confederate governors, persons who had resigned
high federal office to serve the confederacy, and persons who owned
taxable property worth $20,000, or more. But the persons excepted
could be pardoned by the president. It was in excluding the last
class that Johnson's amnesty differed essentially from Lincoln's. In
another proclamation of the same date, W. W. Holden was appointed
provisional governor of North Carolina and directed to order an
election of delegates for a constitutional convention. Johnson's
decision on the suffrage was an important point, and Stanton had tried
hard to get it extended to all freemen, meaning whites and blacks.
But Seward prevailed, and the proclamation offered the franchise to
those who could have voted before secession and who had
c°rt?n R received amnesty. Negro suffrage at that time had not
constructed" ^een demanded in any vote of congress, not even in the
Wade-Davis bill ; and it was denied in every Northern
state except New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
Maine, and Rhode Island. The North Carolina proclamations be-
came a precedent, and in six weeks similar documents were issued for
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas.
The Southerners had waited anxiously while their fate was debated
in Washington. Rumors of confiscation, of negro enfranchisement,
RECONSTRUCTION INAUGURATED 601
and other hardships had filled them with dread. They now recovered
their spirits and even assumed that the North dared not trample under
foot the rights of a sovereign state. They accepted Johnson's terms,
and, when congress met in December, the seven states were in active
process of reconstruction. Johnson did not disturb Lincoln's plans
in Louisiana, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Virginia, and it seemed, there-
fore, that restoration would soon be accomplished in the entire South.
Lincoln and Johnson doubtless thought the exclusion of prominent
Southerners would be temporary. It would neutralize the influence
of former secessionists and fill the conventions and
assemblies with men over whom the administration could
have some influence ; and when the first steps in recon-
struction were taken, the leaders might be gradually readmitted to civil
rights. But the excluded persons did not lose'influence. They were
the South's natural leaders, now more loved because they seemed
martyrs, and, hampered as they were, they continued to devise the
policies of the people. Their sense of injustice gave a tone of de-
fiance to their counsel, and this when it was most important that they
be enlisted for the cause of reconciliation.
By the end of October, 1865, six of the states under Johnson's plan
had held their conventions, and the other, Texas, acted in the spring
of 1866. They all annulled secession and declared slavery
abolished forever ; and all but South Carolina repudiated Progress
the state debts contracted in aid of the confederacy. °^*tes
These steps were taken by the advice of the president, who Johnson's
declared that they were necessary to satisfy the North. Plan.
Soon after the conventions adjourned, the state legislatures
met. To them came the thirteenth amendment for ratification. John-
son again interposed, and at his solicitation it was approved by every
Southern state but Mississippi.
AFFAIRS IN THE SOUTH
The South did not relish what it did, but it acted in good faith. It
believed restoration complete and took up the regulation of the lives of
the freedmen with the feeling that there would be, and
could be, no further interference. The control of the
blacks had ever given them anxiety ; and the black code
of slavery times was designed to restrict the actions of
these people. It was, however, adjusted to slavery, and it seemed to
the Southern legislators of 1865 that it must be re vised to suit the re-
gime of emancipation. The negroes were as illiterate and as little
civilized as before the war, and they were now under less control.
Undoubtedly the legislators exaggerated the negro's liability to make
trouble. He has never shown a violent disposition. But the South
had lived under the black terror for generations, and felt the power of
602 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
it still in the untried problem of 1865. Thus it was that the legis-
latures felt it necessary to prepare new black codes. The conviction
did not grow out of a feeling of hostility to the blacks, but out of a
deep-rooted view of social life.
Before the war the law provided in most states that no slave should
travel without written permission, or have firearms, or trade in the
night-time, or give evidence against a white man, or hold
Black Code Pr°Perty of certain kinds, or reply in kind to a white man's
abuse. He was not tried in the same court with a white
man, nor did his life and liberty have the same safeguards. In short,
the ante-bellum Southerner was satisfied that the negro should have
a lower status than the white man.
The first state legislature to meet under Johnson's plan was that of
Mississippi. It assenlbled in November, 1865, and quickly made a
new black code. In this state feeling was rather extreme,
Black Code. anc^ ^e teg^tors, ignorant of the effect in the North,
made such regulations as comported with their ideas of
the status of the freedmen. The blacks were to have the right to own
personal property, to sue and be sued, to contract legal marriage with
their own race, but not to intermarry with whites, and to be witnesses
when one party in a case was colored. All these things were impos-
sible under the old code, and they seemed to most Southerners notable
concessions. They were balanced by restrictions which showed how
greatly freedom was to be limited ; for it was also provided that a
freedman might not own land, nor could he lease it outside of towns,
that he must have a license naming his home and employment, that his
labor contracts for a term more than a month should be in writing,
that if he violated a labor contract he lost unpaid wages, and that he
should not have firearms unless licensed or in the federal military serv-
ice. It was also provided that if he was adjudged to have no lawful
employment, he was a vagrant and subject to fine. The same punish-
ment was given him for other offenses, as trespass, rioting, seditious
speeches, insulting gestures, preaching without license from a church,
and selling intoxicating liquors. If he could not pay a fine thus im-
posed, he should be handed over to labor for the white man, who would
pay the amount and take him to work for the shortest time. Minor
orphans and children whose parents did not support them were
ordered to be bound out to a white man until of age, and the officer who
ordered the bond should fix the age of the child, if it was doubtful.
These laws did not conflict with the thirteenth amendment, which
prohibited involuntary servitude only when not inflicted for crime.
They created a large scope for crime. The provisions for
Effects of vagrancy and apprenticeship were much like the older laws
Black ^ode. °f Mississippi on the same subjects ; and the Southerners
thought them absolutely necessary in bringing into orderly
relations a mass of crude and disorganized people. Other Southern
WORK OF FREEDMEN'S BUREAU 603
legislatures followed the example of Mississippi, though none of them
went quite so far in repression. They were either not so severe in their
ideas, or were disposed to be cautious because of the criticism the
Mississippi laws aroused in the North. But the new code, taken
all together, created the impression outside the South that the states,
once the problem was entirely in their hands, would impose a con-
dition of part freedom on the former slaves. The radicals, in congress
and out, made much capital of it, and insisted that it showed that
presidential reconstruction did not safeguard the fruits of military
victory.
Meanwhile, the Southerners thought they had ocular demonstra-
tion of the unwise meddling of the North in Southern social conditions.
March 3, 1865, congress created in the war department
"a bureau of refugees, freedmen, and abandoned lands,"
commonly called the freedmen's bureau. It was to Bureau
assume a relation of guardianship over the freedman,
hitherto dependent on his master, to direct his first steps in self-sup-
port, to furnish supplies, to supervise his education and his contracts
to labor, to incite him to good habits, and to protect him against over-
reaching white men, if such should be encountered. The bureau had
a commissioner at the head, an assistant commissioner for each state,
and a large number of local agents, most of them Northern men. It
had large powers in the settlement of disputes between blacks and
whites, and the latter, accustomed to manage their own affairs, con-
sidered it an intrusive organization, and a symbol of their humiliation.
Most of the bureau officials were practical men, although some were
enthusiastic friends of the negro race and had too much confidence in
the effect of freedom on it. But they were at the best in a trying
situation, and became much disliked in the South.
The blacks themselves had little concept of the duties and obliga-
tions of their new condition. By most evidence they worked well dur-
ing the spring and summer of 1865. By autumn they
seemed to be more restless. The freedmen's bureau bill " Forty
provided that the abandoned and confiscated lands of a^JJ2iJ?»
Southerners should be distributed among them at not more
than forty acres to each adult male. As it was doubtful if the confis-
cation act of 1862 would pass the courts, very little land had been ac-
quired by the government, although much was occupied in some dis-
tricts. The distribution was thus delayed, but the negroes knew it
was contemplated, came to look upon it as an act of justice, and in some
unexplained way believed that the donation would be made at the
end of 1865, as a great Christmas gift from the national government.
At this time the South was full of enthusiastic men and women who
as missionaries and teachers sought to uplift the dull minds and souls
which slavery had enthralled. The situation was complex, but it
was an epoch of violent readjustment, and it was not to be expected
604 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
that it should have passed smoothly. The negro himself leaned
hard on the friends from the North, caught at the prospect of "forty
acres and a mule," and, as Christmas approached, refused to contract
for farm labor during the coming year. The white employers were
resentful. They believed that the Northern men in the South were
disorganizing conditions there> and the events which followed — the
hot debates in Congress and the violent language of the radicals —
were not likely to remove the Southerner's suspicions. Thus it hap-
pened that the blacks and whites, who even in the darkest days of
war lived harmoniously side by side, came to be antagonistic and united
in opposition to one another.
JOHNSON'S HOPES
*
During most of 1865 Johnson's reconstruction was popular. The
North was not vindictive, and the people wanted peace. Business
men desired the prosperity of the South, an important
Po ularit8 purchaser of all the products of the North. In the summer
and autumn many conventions indorsed the work of the
president. His first annual message was praised both for its good
sense and its literary excellence. We now know that George Ban-
croft, the historian, was responsible for the latter ; but Johnson him-
self, with Seward and other advisers, was the author of the former.
It declared for peace. Let the two races in the South be left to them-
selves, let not the process of reform be unduly hastened, and "it
may prove that they [the negroes] will receive the kindest usage from
some of those on whom they have hitherto most closely depended."
Johnson and his advisers thought of a new republican party, and
under existing conditions it was not an impossibility. In ten years
the republicans had outlived two great issues, resistance
A Moderate j.Q siaverv anc[ disunion, and must now find another.
Party. *' Johnson believed the moderate men predominated in the
nation. Most of the Northerners who in 1860 supported
Douglas, Breckenridge, and Bell, and probably a third of those who
supported Lincoln believed in the indestructibility of the states, that
is to say, about 65 per cent of the total vote of the non-seceding states.
If these could be brought into one moderate movement, they could
carry the country ; and if the South were restored, it would only in-
crease the strength of the moderates. It was a well-conceived plan,
and under a different leader might have been realized. Those wrho
carefully read the message of 1865 and saw the popularity it aroused
in the country were of a mind that Johnson might succeed.
All this alarmed the radicals. December 4, Thaddeus Stevens,
by getting a two-thirds vote in the house excluded the representatives
from the newly reconstructed states, thus giving notice that presi-
dential reconstruction was opposed by the house. He next moved a
ATTITUDE OF THE RADICALS 605
joint committee on reconstruction, nine members from the house
and six from the senate, and the motion passed by a vote of 133 to 36
in the lower, and 33 to 1 1 in the upper, body. These reso-
lutions were so written that what was done, rested on the The First
unquestioned right of the houses to pass upon the election Effft^rts
of their own members. But the committee proceeded to Radicals,
consider a plan of reconstruction which it would report
before it took up the specific question for which it was named, the
seating of the Southerners. Stevens, now master of the house, was
chairman of the house portion of the committee. He was bitter, able,
and vindictive. He became the most influential of the radicals.
Fessenden, chairman of the senate portion, was somewhat milder in
feeling, but he too was opposed to presidential reconstruction.
But the first move came in the senate. January 5, 1866, the
judiciary committee, through its chairman, Lyman Trumbull, of Illi-
nois, reported the freedmen's bureau bill of 1866. Trum-
bull was an old friend of Lincoln, and in most of the con-
troversy that followed was on the conservative side. His
bill enlarged the powers of the bureau, and continued it
until congress ordered otherwise. It also provided that when a state
by its laws discriminated against the blacks the president should ex-
tend military law over such a state and the bureau officials should
execute it. This was a reply to the enactment of the new black codes.
it was not to apply to states which had not seceded, and it was to be
inoperative after a Southern state had been reconstructed. To those
who held the older theory of the state if seemed violent invasion of a
state's constitutional rights. The law passed the senate by a vote of
37 to 10, and the house by 136 to 33. Johnson vetoed it at once.
His reasons pleased his friends, who thought the bill a dangerous attack
on the state. Some of the senators were apparently convinced by his
arguments, and when the bill came up again in the senate it failed, by
a vote of 30 to 18, to pass over the veto.
Johnson probably thought the country would rally to him, but he
was disappointed. He was attacked bitterly in congress and out. He
was pronounced a democrat, and a Southern sympathizer,
and it was pointed out that his friends in congress were ^
only democrats and half-hearted republicans. He was jo^nson.
unmercifully condemned for a speech on February 22, in
which, carried away by the shouts of noisy admirers, he forgot the
dignity of his office, and charged Stevens, Sumner, and Wendell
Phillips with trying to destroy the principles of the government. His
language and bearing were coarse, and the disgust they occasioned
obscured the constitutional argument he made with ability. In the
light of after events, it seems that if he had accepted the freedman's
bureau bill, he would have drawn to his side the more conservative of
his opponents and reduced the power of the radicals into safe bounds.
606 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
When the senate judiciary committee reported the freedmen's
bureau bill it also reported a civil rights bill, declaring citizens all
persons born in the United States, except Indians not taxed
RigitoBffl an<^ f°reign subjects. It guaranteed equal rights to such
citizens, and reserved cases under this law to the federal
courts. This bill did undoubtedly contravene the older idea that
citizenship belonged to the state, but it was believed by its friends to
be justified under the clause in the thirteenth amendment giving con-
gress the power to enforce the abolition of slavery. Some of Johnson's
wisest friends, foreseeing the impending struggle with congress, urged
him to save himself by accepting the bill ; but when it came to him in
March he vetoed it on the ground that it was a stride toward con-
centration and would "resuscitate the spirit of rebellion." Congress
passed the bill over the veto. From that time Johnson was beaten.
Both of these bills came from the senate and were milder than the
known policy of the house radicals. In each branch of the legislature
were moderate republicans who at first opposed the radical policies.
They were the decisive factor in the situation. If they went for the
president he would triumph. They would probably have stood by
him if he had accepted the bills. But his vetoes showed him uncom-
promisingly for the states, and the moderates would not trust him;
for although they opposed concentration, they believed that to sur-
render the situation to state control would defeat justice in the South
and establish the new black code. «
The debate on these, two bills was bitter, and contained much about
Southern outrages, or violence visited by the Southern whites on
negroes and loyal white men. There was, in fact, much
Outages. disorder in the South. The. whites there believed that
they had rights as citizens of indestructible states; and
they resented the purpose of the radicals as revealed in congress.
They were irritated by the proposition to try cases dealing with
negroes before officials of the freedmen's bureau and to commit a
hundred offenses concerning the rights of the freedmen to federal
courts. Their impatience expressed itself in open conflict with those,
whites and blacks, who defended the new regime. Negroes had been
whipped freely before the war for insubordination; it was not un-
natural that those blacks who now seemed too aggressive or committed
violence should receive the same treatment. Besides, there were
daring spirits who took pleasure in punishing men whom they be-
lieved inimical to Southern society. Moreover, there were many
posts of union troops in the South to preserve order, and their method
of doing it sometimes excited retaliation by young Southerners.
Particularly, if the post was held by negro troops the result was likely
to be conflict. Possibly the acts of violence resulting from all these
causes were no more numerous than were to be expected in such chaotic
conditions ; but each instance was exploited in the North for political
AN AMENDMENT NECESSARY 607
effect. Repeated in the papers, they showed to the satisfaction of
most men that the South was still rebellious and should not control
the rights and liberty of the former slaves. The outrages were ex-
aggerated in the Northern press : in most parts of the South and at
most times life was quiet and there was safety for the people.
THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT
No one in Washington in the spring of 1866 thought that the enact-
ment of the freedmen's bureau and the civil rights bills would satisfy
all parties. The house, in the hands of the radicals, with
Stevens at the head, would spend all its strength to carry
out a policy of severe reconstruction. But the senate conress,
was less united. In fact, it contained four factions. One,
a rather large one, was as radical as Stevens ; another was radical,
but temperately so; another was composed of moderate republicans
who had followed Lincoln, and another of democrats who were openly
for the South. The fourth group was the only one that Johnson could
count on. The third was friendly in the beginning of the year, and
probably would have continued so if he had accepted the two bills
just mentioned. It was currently said that he promised to approve
the civil rights bill, and his subsequent veto of it was considered an
act of bad faith which further alienated the men of the third group.
With all the senate republicans united it was possible to carry a bill
over the president's veto.
The radicals were conscious of their power and jubilant over the
prospect of success. Their first move was an amendment giving con-
stitutional vigor to the main features of the civil rights bill.
But in its first form the fourteenth amendment dealt with Fourteenth
negro suffrage alone. It did not seem fair that the South, the _^™e
old three-fifths apportionment being now obsolete, should Form,
have full benefit of its colored population while it excluded
them from the polls. So it was proposed to exclude negroes from the
basis of representation in those states in which they might not vote.
As this would be a loss of representation in such states, it was hoped
that it would impel them to concede the franchise to the freedmen.
In this form the amendment passed the house by a vote of 120 to 32,
but it failed in the senate. Five extreme radicals, Sumner among them,
voted against it because it did not authorize negro suffrage outright.
This was before the veto of the civil rights bill. Nearly two
months later the amendment came before congress in a new form.
The provision regarding suffrage was retained, and three
features of the vetoed bill were added: i. "All persons
born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the
states wherein they reside." 2. No state should abridge the rights
6o8 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
of such citizens. 3. No state should "deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property without due process of law" or deny equal pro-
tection of the laws. It also excluded from federal or state office until
pardoned by congress persons who, having held high federal or state
office, later supported the confederacy. It guaranteed the payment of
the national war debt, and ordered that no state should pay the con-
federate debt or pay for the loss of the slaves through emancipation.
It was so sweeping a program of reconstruction that the extreme
radicals would not oppose it. Sumner and three of his five colleagues
in the senate who voted against the first form now gave it their votes,
and it passed, both houses by the necessary two-thirds vote. It only
remained to be approved by three-fourths of the states.
No one could doubt that the Northern states would ratify; but
the Southern states were more than a fourth of the 27 states then in
the union and could defeat the amendment. Would
betheted ^ey accept or reject? Most republicans were ready to
South. forget all if those states, chastened by adversity, approved
the amendment. In view of what came later, they would
have done well to bow the head to the yoke and submit to necessity.
But the fires of controversy had filled them with defiance, and one by
one in the autumn of 1866 and in the winter following they repudiated
the amendment. Their legislatures under the Johnson plan were
full of ex-confederates, who took it as an indignity to disfranchise
their former comrades, repudiate the confederate debt, and accept a
lower rank in congress. They were in despair, and felt that if they must
be humiliated, it might better come through the force of the conqueror
than by their own consent. Posterity has some admiration for their
spirit, but the Northern people were only inclined to think them stiff-
necked and unreasonable.
The situation pleased the extreme radicals, who felt that the North
must now come to a policy of severity. The autumn elections seemed
to support them, since the senate was now republican by
Radicals in 42 to ii votes and the house by 143 to 49. Stevens and
Control.8 ' Sumner, who thought that the negro could only be pro-
tected by having the ballot, were ready to demand negro
suffrage, and believed the country would indorse such a demand.
Garfield, in the house, summed up their feeling in a remarkable speech.
Congress, he said, had been generous : it might, had it so desired, have
hanged "every rebel traitor in the South for their bloody conspiracy,"
or confiscated their property ; but through generosity it had withheld
its hand. Its offer to receive the Southern states into the union with
no other restriction than the fourteenth amendment had been flung
back into its face, and "it is now our turn to act. They would not
cooperate with us in rebuilding what they destroyed. We must re-
move the rubbish and rebuild from the bottom." By the rubbish,
he meant the existing governments under Johnson's plan. The
THE RADICALS UNHAMPERED 609
Southerners believed that by holding out courageously they could
block the amendment forever, since it could not be adopted without
their consent. By rebuilding the government in their states from the
bottom, Garfield meant that the negroes themselves must be allowed
to vote, that they would thus gain control of the Southern states, and
that the amendment could then be ratified. This favorite program of
the extreme radicals was now to be carried into effect.
THE RECONSTRUCTION ACTS OF 1867
The first concern of the radicals was to abolish the governments
Johnson had set up in the Southern states, and to substitute others
which conformed to the radical theory. Stevens had ever
advocated such a course and introduced a bill to that
effect in the first session of the existing congress. Mod-
erate views, however, had prevailed and his bill was not
pressed. He now, January 3, 1867, called it up, and spite of the op-
position of the liberals, it was referred to the joint committee on re-
construction, which reported it a month later with some modifications.
It abolished existing southern governments and created military rule
in the South to continue during the pleasure of congress. The house
passed it, but the senate moderates opposed it so strongly that com-
promise was necessary. The bill as it passed the house provided that
the military governors be appointed by the general of the army —
General Grant. The moderate senators did not like to ignore the
president's constitutional power as commander-in-chief, they thought
he ought to appoint the military governors, and they wished the bill
to specify the time at which the scheme should cease to operate. They
had their way, and the measure in its final form passed both houses,
was vetoed by Johnson, and passed over his veto, March 2, 1867.
Sumner, always the champion of negro suffrage, desired that the bill
specify that the state constitutions to be adopted under the proposed
scheme should enfranchise the freedmen, and his demand was granted.
The act of March 2 was the first of three which together embodied the
congressional plan of reconstruction.
Its chief features were: i. The South was to be divided into five
military districts as follows: (a) Virginia, (b) the Carolinas,
(c) Georgia, Florida, 'and Alabama, (d) Mississippi and
Louisiana, and (e) Texas and Arkansas. Tennessee was not JJ1^0* °f
in this arrangement, for in 1866 it accepted the fourteenth Ig^
amendment and was recognized as in full fellowship.
2. Over each military district there was to "be a military governor
appointed by the president with the consent of the senate. 3. This
governor must preserve order in his district, and he might continue
local civil officers there or supplant them by military tribunals as he
2R
6io RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
saw fit. 4. A constitutional convention should be called in each state,
the delegates being chosen by all citizens, regardless of race or color,
except those disfranchised for rebellion or for felony at common law.
5. When the revised constitution, which must accept the franchise
provided in this act, was approved by those who voted for the mem-
bers of the convention and was accepted by congress, and when the
legislature under it had adopted the fourteenth amendment and the
said amendment had become a part of the federal constitution, such a
state should be readmitted into the union and military government
should cease.
The day after this act was passed congress adjourned. Its last
care was to call an extra session of the succeeding congress, the fortieth,
to meet on March 4. It had taken the situation into its
March 23 own nands so effectually that even this function was taken
from the president. The new congress was more opposed
to Johnson than its predecessor, and carried on the task of reconstruc-
tion with eagerness. The act of March 2 merely enacted a plan ; a
new law, that of March 23, provided machinery for putting the
plan into effect. It provided for a registration of voters and for hold-
ing the elections of delegates to the conventions. It also provided
that a constitution to be accepted must have the approval of a major-
ity of the registered voters. This was done to meet an objection of the
other, side that the proposed proceedings in the South would be only
minority legislation. Johnson vetoed this act and congress overrode
the veto. Johnson's opposition now ceased. He considered it his
duty to enforce the law and appointed the five military governors pro-
vided for, all generals of prominence ; and they ordered registrations
of voters and called for elections as the laws directed.
The radicals thought their work well done, but the Southerners,
with the aid of Stanbery, the attorney-general, found a weak point in
it. The law allowed all to register who did not volun-
Tuf ^Ct °f tarily serve the confederacy. Did the registration officers
1867. 9> have authority to determine that an applicant had fought
voluntarily or involuntarily ? The question was referred
to Washington, and Stanbery decided that the officers had no dis-
cretion and must register all who offered. Under this interpreta-
tion of the law the Southerners would register in large numbers and
probably defeat the objects of congressional reconstruction. The
radicals were alarmed. Secretary of War Stanton, their chief reliance
in the cabinet, was in entire opposition to the president, and wrote a
new law which congress passed over Johnson's veto July 19, 1867. It
was the third reconstruction act of the radicals. It gave the regis-
tration officials the specific authority Stanbery had not found in the
first acts, and in other ways made it impossible to evade the will of
the congressional majority. In these three laws congressional
reconstruction received its legal basis and became inevitable.
BRIDLING THE PRESIDENT 611
Although Johnson kept within the letter of the law and obeyed it
when it was clear, he was not trusted and was much disliked. Con-
gress expressed its feeling by fixing the times of its own
reassembling, and in allowing many contemptuous utter- FeeHns
ances on the floors of the two houses. He gave great johSon.
offense in the summer of 1866 in several speeches in what
was known as his " swinging-around-the-circle " tour in the West.
He was said to have been intoxicated when he spoke at Cleveland,
where the jibes from the crowd irritated him until he broke into a
series of angry and rude retorts. It was probably the most undignified
exhibition a president of the United States ever made of himself. It
gave an argument to his enemies, who redoubled their abuse and
aroused such contempt for him in the country that they felt able to
treat him in the most disdainful manner without fear of popular re-
proof. They pronounced him a traitor, and talked openly of impeach-
ing him. They desired to take out of his hands the execution of their
program.
They had wished to take from him the appointment of the military
governors, but the moderates in the senate blocked them in that.
Then they passed over his veto the tenure-of-office act,
March 2, 1867. Secretary Stanton, they thought, was
necessary to their plans. He was bold, resourceful, and
defiant of Johnson. If he should be dismissed from the war depart-
ment, where he had a wide supervision over the new military dis-
tricts, and a man of Johnson's way of thinking should take his place,
much might be lost in the execution of the reconstruction laws. By
the act now passed, federal employees confirmed by the senate should
hold office until their successors were duly appointed, but cabinet
members should remain in office during the term of the president
who named them and for one month thereafter. It also directed
that if the president removed a cabinet officer during the recess of
congress, he should report the case to the senate within twenty days
after it convened, and the senate might order the reinstatement of the
officer in question. Such a removal could, therefore, only be a sus-
pension. The constitution is not specific on this point, but in 1867 it
had been held for a long time that it gave the president the power to
dismiss a cabinet officer, and Jackson and others had exercised the
right. Johnson and his advisers, therefore, disputed the constitu-
tionality of the tenure-of-office act and were prepared to test it in the
courts when the opportunity came.
AN APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT
Not only Johnson but many others opposed to the plans of the
radicals turned their eyes to the supreme court, finding in it the last
hope of checking the course of the innovators. They saw in all that
612 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
was done an exaltation of military authority and a dangerous menace
to liberty. If the court did not save them, they thought, who would ?
The first appeal was in the case known as ex parte Milligan, decided
in 1866, and here the verdict was for the conservatives. It gave
EX arte them much satisfaction, although the case did not bear
Milligan directly on the reconstruction controversy. In 1864
Milligan and two others were convicted by a military com-
mission of giving aid to the enemy, and the sentence was death. Lin-
coln would not confirm the sentence, and when peace came, the men
were in prison. They contended that military law ceased to operate
with the end of hostilities, secured a writ of habeas corpus, and were
released. The supreme court held that neither the president nor con-
gress could declare martial law or try civilians by military tribunals in
places where the civil courts were open. The decision would seem to
check the tendency of the radicals to do what they would Under the
guise of military law. Two other decisions encouraged the conserva-
tives. In Missouri, a state law forbade licenses in various professions
to be issued to former confederates. In Cummings v. Missouri the
supreme court held that the statute was ex post facto. In Arkansas
it was attempted to deprive confederates of license to practice law in
the federal courts, but the supreme court held in ex parte Garland that
this also was ex post facto. These three decisions came in December,
1866, and January, 1867, when the radicals were beginning to urge
their plan on congress. Some of the more timid ones faltered, but
Stevens treated the decisions with contempt. It seemed that he
would attack the court as readily as he opposed the president : his
attitude gave courage to his followers, and the acts of March 2 and 23,
establishing military government were passed and carried into effect.
The country soon had opportunity to see what the courts would do
about them.
The state of Mississippi in April, 1867, applied for an injunction to
restrain the president from executing the recent laws. If it thought
that because he was opposed to their passage he would
us Johnson contest their execution they were mistaken. He con-
sidered the acts good law and executed them as he thought
they were to be understood. Stanbery, the attorney-general, resisted
the injunction as counsel for his superior, arguing that the president
could be tried only by a court of impeachment, and urging that the
matter was really political and that the courts ought not to interfere.
The decision supported his contention and the injunction was denied.
So clear had been the attitude of the court in the preceding winter
and so open the defiance of the radicals that the South
Stouten. M could not rest wi* this decision- Tney brought another
case, this time taking care to eliminate the president from
it. Georgia now took the initiative, applying for a similar injunction,
but against Secretary Stanton. This also was denied, the court hold-
SEEKING EVIDENCE AGAINST JOHNSON 613
ing that a writ which might not issue against the president might not
issue against his agent, a member of his cabinet.
These two decisions showed how unwilling the court was to take
part in the fierce controversy then waging. A third made their at-
titude still clearer. McCardle, a Mississippi editor, gave
offense to the new military government and was arrested,
The civil rights act of 1866 provided that the supreme
court might issue writs of habeas corpus; and McCardle took advan-
tage of it to get his liberty. It seemed plain that by the decision in
ex parte Milligan, which declared that military law should not exist
in time of peace, he must be released. His opponents alleged no juris-
diction, but the plea was overruled. The radicals were alarmed,
and hastily carried a law through congress to withdraw from the court
the right to issue a writ of habeas corpus. The court was relieved
from what was evidently a painful situation. It declared that it now
had no jurisdiction, and in a high-sounding declaration that it declined
ungranted jurisdiction it gave notice that it was not inclined to inter-
fere with the program of the lawmakers. Thus passed the hope that
radical reconstruction might be stayed by the supreme court. Stevens
was supreme, military government in the South was doing the work
expected of it, and he proceeded to the last phase of his plan, the im-
peachment of the president — a thing he seemed to desire as much for
vengeance as to terrify the country and overawe the last vestige of
opposition.
THE IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON
In January, 1867, the house ordered its judiciary committee to see
if evidence could be found to support impeachment. The committee
made an investigation and reported no such evidence had
been secured, but advised that further efforts be made. First
•\r v • j Efforts to
March 7 a new congress was in extra session and gave Impeach
similar instructions to its own committee. Four months Johnson,
later there was another report, also against impeachment.
But the committee was instructed to continue its labors, and in the
autumn it reported for impeachment by a vote of five to four. Three
thousand pages of evidence relating to all kinds of acts of the president
were submitted to the house, which, on consideration, seemed insuffi-
cient, and by a vote of 1 80 to 57 the house declined to arraign the presi-
dent, who, according to the constitution, is impeachable for "treason,
bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." No one alleged
treason or bribery in Johnson's case, but the extreme radicals thought
he had committed "high crimes and misdemeanors" in opposing
congress. Moderate republicans were inclined to hold that the term
did not apply to actions in their nature political, but to those which
were felonies or which broke specific laws; of such actions Johnson
6 14 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
was innocent. In an impeachment trial the senators, who sit as judges,
are not bound by the ordinary rules of evidence. They hear testi-
mony and argument and decide as they think best. Under such con-
ditions and in view of the strong political feelings of the day, it was
not to be expected that the trial, if ordered, would be free from bias.
But conviction required a two- thirds vote, the democrats would op-
pose it, and a few moderate republicans would do the same unless
the case was clearly made out. The state of public opinion must also
be considered. The nation was not willing' to degrade a president,
not even Johnson, for actions he thought politically wise. They
would demand some overt act, and impeachment in default of it
might fail in the senate and react against the republican party in the
elections now approaching. The desired incident came in the winter
of 1867-1868.
In August, 1867, Johnson suspended Stanton from the secretaryship
of war and put General Grant in his place. December 1 2 he reported
the matter to the senate as the tenure-of-office act re-
Suspended qu^d. The senate after much discussion disapproved
the suspension, Grant retired, and Stanton resumed his
duties. Johnson thought the act unconstitutional which shackled
him, but, while he obeyed it, he was careful to say nothing admitting
its legality. Stanton was in constant communication with the con-
gressional radicals, and Johnson regarded his presence at cabinet
meetings as intolerable. The president wished Grant to refuse to
retire, which would force an appeal to the courts and get a ruling on
the tenure-of-office act. Grant hesitated: he was friendly to John-
son, but wished to avoid a conflict with the strong war secretary.
Finally, the president asked him at least to resign office a few days
before the senate should come to its Decision, so that a man might be
appointed who would oppose Stanton. The president and five cabinet
members asserted that the general gave the promise, but he as con-
fidently denied it, and the nature of the misunderstanding was not ex-
plained. An angry quarrel began which would have been avoided if
Johnson had been tactful ; for he could not afford at this juncture to
lose the good will of so powerful a man as the victor over Lee.
The president thought the dignity of his office as well as his own self-
respect demanded that he should not yield ; and he resolved to proceed
directly. He afterwards claimed that his sole object was
Removed. to test tne objectionable law in the courts. February
21, five weeks after resuming his duties, Stanton was dis-
missed by an executive order, and Adjutant General Lorenzo Thomas
was directed to take charge of the war department. Thomas promptly
called on Stanton to vacate the office and allowed the latter a day to
close up his affairs in it. But next morning, before he could proceed
farther, he was arrested for violating the tenure-of-office act. He
employed counsel, who prepared to take the affair before the courts,
IMPEACHMENT CARRIED 615
and the president was overjoyed to see the case assume the form he
had long desired. But he was to be disappointed; for almost at
once Thomas was released from custody, and with such haste that it
was evident his opponents repented arresting him. He was not a
man to oppose the strong-willed Stanton, no one wanted an armed
struggle with the war department, and here this phase of the contro-
versy rested, Stanton still exercising his functions.
Meanwhile, the case went to another tribunal. As soon as he was
dismissed, Stanton informed his friends in the house. They saw in it
the long-sought overt act on which to base impeachment.
After a continuous two-days' session they resolved by a J°hnso*|
party vote that "Andrew Johnson, President of the United
States, be impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors in office."
Feeling ran high, and in the house radicals and moderate republicans
joined to press the charges to the utmost. There was hardly a man
among them who doubted that their enemy was at last delivered into
their hands. March 4, 1868, seven managers chosen by the house
appeared before the senate with eleven specific charges on which they
demanded that the president be tried. Next day the senate sat as a
court of impeachment, Chief Justice Chase in the chair. Ten days
were allowed the defendant to prepare his case, while the house ap-
pointed a committee of seven to conduct the prosecution. Its most
conspicuous members were Benjamin F. Butler, George S. Boutwell,
and Thaddeus Stevens, all better known as politicians than as con-
stitutional lawyers. Johnson had the advantage of drawing his
attorneys from the best men in the country. His array of counsel was
most distinguished and embraced such men as Stanbery, the attorney-
general, who was familiar with the controversy in all its stages, Justice
Curtis, formerly of the supreme court, and William M. Evarts, head of
the New York bar.
The indictment held in substance that Johnson committed "high
crimes and misdemeanors," (i) in dismissing Stanton contrary to the
tenure-of-office act, (2) in declaring that certain laws were
"unconstitutional, (3) in maliciously criticizing congress in charges
the " swinging-around-the-circle " speeches of 1866, and
(4) in opposing congressional reconstruction generally. Only the
first of these, which was the substance of the first eight actually
presented, related to late action by the president. The third was
suggested by Butler, who thought it might appeal to the feelings of
some senators who had scruples in regard to the first. The fourth,
known as the "omnibus article," was suggested by Stevens in some-
what the same spirit. There were fifty-four senators, and it was,
therefore, necessary to get thirty-six votes to secure con- The _
viction. The twelve democrats could be counted for
acquittal, an equal number of republicans were as certain to be for
conviction, and the rest were disposed to hear the evidence and argu-
6i6 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
ments before making up their minds. If seven of these were for John-
son he was secure.
This interesting question soon came up: Shall the senate act
as a judicial or a political body? If the former, it was necessary
to submit evidence which would have weight in a court of justice;
if the latter, it was only necessary to convince the senators that John-
son should be removed. The prosecutors took the latter view, and
Butler and Stevens defended it with much shrewdness. They con-
tinually addressed Chase as "Mr. President," while the opposing
counsel addressed him as "Mr. Chief Justice." He, with the instincts
of a jurist, leaned to the view that the senate was a court, and passed on
evidence as though he were sitting on the bench. But he submitted
his opinions to the senate, which, by a mere majority vote, usually
overruled them.
Johnson's strongest points were that he removed Stanton to test
the tenure-of-office act, that he thought the act unconstitutional,
and that holding this view it was his privilege and duty
Defense ^° Proceed so that the point at issue should be decided in
court. He offered to show that the whole cabinet, Stanton
included, thought the act unconstitutional when enacted. Chase
would admit this evidence, but the senate overruled him. The de-
fense also urged that the removal of the secretary did not violate
that act, which provided that a cabinet member should hold office
during the term of the president who appointed him and for one
month thereafter. Stanton was appointed by Lincoln and was not
protected by the act. These points were brought out so ably
by Curtis that it was soon evident that if Johnson were convicted it
would be on political grounds.
Cautious republicans now became alarmed lest conviction on po-
litical grounds react on the party. Additional strength was given to
the point by the reflection that Wade, president of the
(MnTn senate, was next in line for the succession. He was a
Turning. bitter partisan whom reasonable men did not wish to see
in power. As the trial proceeded passions cooled, both in
and out of Washington. Johnson observed the tendency, and in the
nick of time, April 23, nominated General Schofield secretary of war.
The nominee had the confidence of the nation, and the selection of
such a man broke the force of the argument of the radicals that a
creature of the president was about to be placed over the important
interests within the department of war. The effect was good, and
as the argument proceeded — from April 22 to May n — the nation
came to understand the president better. The press modified its
tone, and the opinion gained ground that Johnson should be allowed
to fill out the rest of his term.
May 1 6 the senate was ready to vote. The prosecution was
alarmed for the result and decided to take the first vote on the eleventh,
JOHNSON ACQUITTED 617
or last, specification. It contained most of the vigor of the others, and
they thought it offered the best chance of success. The roll was
called in breathless expectancy. A few senators had con-
cealed their intentions so well that the response of each J™
• i i T-< IT m i 11 uccision.
was awaited most anxiously. Four republicans, Trumbull,
Fessenden, Grimes, and Henderson, were known to be for acquittal,
and three others with the twelve democrats would prevent convic-
tion. One of these was secured when Fowler, of Tennessee, voted for
acquittal. Another was found when Ross, of Kansas, gave the same
response. Van Winkle, of West Virginia, made the third. The hearts
of the radicals sank when he deserted them, and they realized they
were defeated. Johnson had 19 votes and his opponents 35, and
he retained his office by one vote. The radicals adjourned the senate
for ten days, while they ransacked heaven and earth to show that
improper influences had been used on the senators who were for
acquittal. They sought particularly to shake the determination of
Ross, but without avail. When the senate convened again and took
up the first and second articles, he remained firm, and the entire prose-
cution was defeated. Stanton yielded to the inevitable, and Schofield
took possession of the war department without opposition.
The will of the radicals was at last checked. They had overthrown
presidential reconstruction, shackled the president in regard to the
appointing power, and made negro suffrage an actuality.
But they had become too confident of their power. Their
last act smacked too much of personal animosity to have yer(jict.
the support of the nation. When they talked of saving
in the South the fruits of war, they found a ready response, but when
their demands seemed to mean the establishment of a congressional
oligarchy in control of the national executive, they failed. The ver-
dict of the senate marked a return to normal conditions As Professor
Dunning remarks, it also showed that the presidential element in our
system will maintain its equal rank with the legislative power.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For general works see : Rhodes, History of the United States, 7 vols. (1892-1006) ;
Dunning, Reconstruction, Political and Economic (1907); Ibid., Essays on the Civil
War and Reconstruction (ed. 1904) ; Burgess, Reconstruction and the Constitution
(1902) ; Wilson, History of the American People, 5 vols. (1902) ; Andrews, The
United States in our Own Time (1903) ; Woodburn, American Political History, 2
vols. (1905), valuable articles on political and economic topics (chiefly by Alexander
Johnston, and reprinted from Lador, Cyclopedia of Political Science, 3 vol. (1883).
Two popular works of indifferent reliability are : Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress,
2 vols. (1884-1886), and Cox, Three Decades of Federal Legislation (1885), a large
part of the latter prepared by Daniel C. Goodloe.
For published sources see : The Congressional Globe, which changes its name to
Record in 1873, contains the debates in congress; Reports of Committees and Mis-
cellaneous Documents, in each of which are many reports of investigations of affairs
in the South ; the United States Statutes at Large, passim ; The Revised Statutes of the
6i8 RECONSTRUCTION — THE NATIONAL SIDE
United States, 2 vols. (1878) ; Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents,
10 vols. (1898); McPherson, Political History during Reconstruction (ed. 1875),
a combined and revised form of the author's Political M anual for the years 1866-
1870; Ibid., Handbook of Politics, 1872, 1874, 1876, and 1878, contains party votes
in congress and many documents ; Fleming, Documentary History of Reconstruction,
2 vols. (1906-1907) ; MacDonald, Select Statutes, 1861-1898 (1903) ; and Appleton's
Annual Cyclopedia.
Biographies and works of leading men are : Sumner, Works, 15 vols. (1870-1883) ;
Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Sumner, 4 vols. (ed. 1894); Welles, edr., Diary of
Gideon Welles, 3 vols. (1911) ; Jones, Life of Andrew Johnson (1901), unsatisfactory,
a biography by Professor Fleming is announced. Carl Schurz, Reminiscences, 3
vols. (1907-1908), with a biographical sketch by Bancroft and Dunning; Garfield,
Works, 2 vols. (1883); The Sherman Letters (1894), the correspondence between
General W. T., and his brother, Senator John Sherman; John Sherman, Recol-
lections of Forty Years, 2 vols. (1895); Badeau, Grant in Peace (1887); Garland,
Ulysses S. Grant (1898) ; Bancroft, William H. Seward, 2 vols. (1900) ; Gorham,
Life ofStanton, 2 vols. (1890) ; Hart, Salmon Portland Chase (1899) ; Gail Hamilton
[Dodge], Biography of Elaine (1895) ; Adams, Charles Francis Adams (1900) ;
Merriam, Life of Samuel Bowles, 2 vols. (1885) ; Foulke, Oliver P. Morton, 2 vols.
(1899) ; Woodburn, Thaddeus Stevens (1913) ; Mayes, Lucius Q. C. Lamar (1896) ;
Salter, /. W. Grimes (1876) ; and Fessenden, Life of W. P. Fessenden, 2 vols. (1907).
On special phases of the political history of the times see : DeWitt, The Impeach-
ment and Trial of Andrew Johnson (1903) ; Barnes, History of the Thirty-Ninth
Congress (1868), lacks insight; Chadsey, The Struggle between President Johnson
and Congress over Reconstruction (Columbia Studies, 1896) ; and Dilla, The Politics
of Michigan, 1865-1878 (Ibid., 1912).
For references on the Southern side of reconstruction see page 638.
For Independent Reading
Dunning, Reconstruction, Political and Economic (1907) ; Elaine, Twenty Years
of Congress, 2 vols. (1884-1886) ; Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years, 2 vols.
(1903) ; Poore, Perley's Reminiscences, 2 vols. (1886) ; McClure, Recollections of
Half a Century (1902) ; Haynes, Life of Charles Sumner (1909) ; and Ogden, Life
and Letters of E. L. Godkin, 2 vols. (1907).
CHAPTER XXIX
RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
SOCIAL CONDITIONS IN THE SOUTH
THE Southern people accepted military defeat as well as could be
expected. If at that point there had been nothing to do but forget
the surrender and resume the habits of peace, restoration
would have been simple, as after other civil wars in his- g^^^
tory. But the people found themselves subjected to Attitude?
social and political changes which they could not approve,
and were thrust into a controversy more bitter than the first. They
believed sincerely in the inferiority of the negro and thought it quite
enough to admit him to the elementary phases of citizenship. They
could not understand clearly the demand that he have equal status
with the whites, and it took them a long time to realize that the North
would really make the demand. They also believed in state rights ;
they thought it impossible that a state's constitution should be
modified by any force outside of itself ; and they considered as wicked
and unconstitutional the proposition that congress could dictate
what a state constitution should contain. Early in the dawn of peace
they had little bitterness for their conquerors, and the first steps of
reconstruction under Johnson increased their good feeling. But the
rising influence of the radicals in 1866 and 1867 brought rage and
finally despair. The results of this violent social and political readjust-
ment were strife, a loss of national feeling, and delay in the process
of reunion. Whether or not, in view of these results, the North or
the negro, whom it sought to help, gained or lost is a problem still
open for discussion.
The North was surprised at the resistance of the Southerner.
They thought he would yield to the fourteenth amendment, and were
surprised as each act of force a little harder than the pre-
ceding act found him still unyielding. He had, in fact, Ru°n°n
suffered so much already that he did not feel keenly the loss
of other rights or comforts. The war itself reduced his living to a
dependence on the simple products of his farm, and he was accustomed
to do without the comforts of prosperity. It exhausted the railroads,
factories, and fields, and its failure swept away banks, insurance com-
panies, and every other institution which lent money to the corn-
dig
620 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
munity. With production and credit paralyzed, and labor dis-
organized through emancipation, what worse calamity need be feared
in industrial activities ?
The same question might be asked in regard to social conditions.
Elsewhere slavery has usually been abolished with compensation, or
allowed to shift into some half-free form out of which
Reversal comes ultimate freedom. In the South it was abolished
suddenly, without compensation, and at a time when in-
dustry, from other causes, was prostrate. The English stock has
usually adopted reforms gradually and by compromise. The change
in the South from 1865 to 1870 through the changed condition of the
negro was the most violent reform that has occurred in a similar
period in any part of the world under British institutions.
It was supposed that the imposition of military rule would break
the spirit of the Southerner, but he took it almost nonchalantly. In
1865 most men in the South had been confederate soldiers
Des eration anc^ were used to military law, and after the war the
country was full of garrisons. They were, therefore,
neither shocked nor frightened when military governors took charge
in 1867. In fact, the recurrence of local outbreaks in retaliation on
unpopular officers shows that the Southerners were willing to use
force themselves. It is, from all these considerations, evident that
by 1867 the white men in the South were becoming desperate. They
felt that their opponents had done the worst — that nothing remained
to be done but to take their lives, which not even the North would
dare do. Out of this desperation grew the conviction that violence,
fraud, and any other expedient was justifiable to overcome the plot
of the 'radicals. Out of it grew, also, a white " Solid South" and
fierce contempt for every political ideal which was called " Republican."
In 1865 the average negro in the South valued freedom because it
gave him the simplest privileges of freemen. He did not desire to
vote, and he did not understand the hopes of the many
I?a Negr° missionaries and teachers from the North who with much
Citizen. heroism tried to elevate him. At first he was submissive
to the whites with that docile self-effacement which has
generally characterized the African. When his new friends tried to
kindle his ambition his self-assertion became obtrusive. The southern
whites thought he was spoiled by Northerners. The points of view
of the two sections in regard to his development were irreconcilable ;
but as the months passed he became continually less willing to trust
his former masters and more inclined to follow new friends. When
allowed to vote in 1867 he was as clay in the hands of the latter.
In the seceding states, exclusive of South Carolina, Breckenridge,
the secessionist, had 436,771 votes in 1860, Douglas, anti-secessionist
democrat, had 72,084, and Bell, representing the old whig party, had
345,919. Loyalty to the South induced most of these men to
SOUTHERN REPUBLICANS 621
support the confederacy, but, the war ended, it was not to be ex-
pected that they would all act together. The Douglas and Bell men
were for the union in 1860, and they were nearly half
of the Southern voters. They might be conceived still The
to be mostly for union under the old conditions. It was
not unreasonable to suppose that at least a small portion servatives."
of the Breckenridge men would be of the same opinion.
If, therefore, party lines in the South were to be drawn for and against
a policy of resistance to the North, it seemed that here was the basis
of a successful movement to unite the reasonable men in that section
in a party which would accept the issues of the war and attempt to
reconstruct Southern life on the lines pointed out in the emancipa-
tion proclamation and the president's reconstruction policy. Such
was Johnson's dream, but it was futile. As the purpose of the radical
congress to impose negro suffrage on the South became apparent, the
Southerners of all groups united in solid opposition. Whigs, Douglas
democrats, and former secessionists forgot their ancient grudges and
fought side by side under the new name of "Conservatives."
Meanwhile, a southern republican party began to form out of
three groups. One was Northern men recently arrived in the South.
Some of these were former soldiers, whose campaign ex-
periences had first opened their eyes to the opportunities " Carpet-
of a rich country ; others came outright, believing that fad ^Seal-
industry would feel a new impulse under a regime of free- awags."
dom ; while still others were earnest men who wished to
help the freedmen. Most of them were poor, bringing all their pos-
sessions in their hands, and the South in derision called them " Carpet-
baggers." Some of them were men of fine character, and would have
been an acquisition to the social life of any community in normal
conditions. Others were mere adventurers. The conservative South-
ern whites made no distinction between the good and the bad, but
poured equal scorn on all. A second element of the Southern repub-
lican party was native Southerners. A few men of prominence,
mostly those who loved the old flag throughout the war, now
went into the party which stood for union; but most of this group
were persons who felt aggrieved at the rule of the old planter class.
They were generally small farmers, men of little social or intellectual
eminence, and they were apt to be viewed with disdain by the more
capable portion of the whites. They accepted the program of the
radicals in congress, and from them received much consideration as
" truly loyal" persons who endured wrongs in behalf of the union.
Among them appeared a number of leaders of their own class, men
of sharp tongues and shrewd political capacity, who stimulated the
hopes of their followers by criticizing the old ruling classes, and who
endured placidly the odium of those classes, even though it extended
to social ostracism. Such leaders were regarded as traitors to the
522 RECONSTRUCTION— THE SOUTHERN SIDE
South, and received from their opponents the name "Scalawags." It
was a term of doubtful origin, but it implied the essence of bitter
contempt and opposition.
Still a third element which went into the Southern republican party
was the negroes. Johnson wished, as Lincoln before him, that the
intelligent and property-holding blacks should be allowed
to vote> kut he could accomplish nothing in that line
publican. w^tn tne state governments restored under his plan.
When, however, the blacks were allowed to vote under the
laws of March 2 and 23 and July 19, 1867, they went almost solidly
for the republicans. They were the largest portion of the party, and
their enfranchisement brought forth at once a number of negro leaders
who must be given office or they would not cooperate. They were
usually satisfied with minor places, but not always. Sometimes they
were on the state tickets, and they were even sent to congress as rep-
resentatives and senators. Most of the negro politicians were mu-
lattoes, but sometimes they were of unmixed African stock. The
best of them had little education, but a fair amount of common sense
and integrity, while the majority did not comprehend the duties of
their offices and took their elevation to power as an opportunity to
secure small personal glory and emolument. They quickly fell into
the hands of abler white schemers, and in legislatures and elsewhere
facilitated the excesses of bad government without realizing that they
brought dishonor to their party and their communities. As these
three groups became welded in the republican party in the South
the influence of the more upright "carpet-baggers," Southern whites,
and negro politicians was minimized, and the will of the worst
leaders became predominant. To the Southern whites it seemed that
the acme of bad government had come. The excesses committed were
beyond anything the people of the United States have seen elsewhere
in their borders, and went far to justify the illegal methods by which
the conservative whites at last were able to redeem themselves from a
reign of fraud, ignorance, and incompetence.
CONGRESSIONAL RECONSTRUCTION IN OPERATION
It was in March, 1867, that Johnson appointed the military gov-
ernors created in the act of March 2. General Schofield was in charge
of the first district (Virginia), General Sickles was over
Mmtar the seconcl (North and South Carolina), General Pope
Governors. ruled the third (Georgia, Alabama, and Florida), General
Ord commanded the fourth (Mississippi and Arkansas),
and General Sheridan had the fifth (Louisiana and Texas). In his
district each had supreme power under the president and the consti-
tution and laws of Congress. They desired to continue in power the
existing state officials, but promptly removed such as obstructed the
DISORDER IN THE SOUTH 623
registration of the negroes. When it was proposed to remove all the
local officials, Schofield checked the plan by saying the South did
not contain enough " loyal" whites to fill the vacancies which would
thus be created. In 1868, as the process of reconstruction neared
completion, removals were more frequent. A notable
case was that of Governor Jenkins, of Georgia, who was
dismissed for refusing to allow payment of the expenses continued,
of the constitutional convention. Governor Humphreys,
of Mississippi, was removed also for opposing reconstruction.
Likewise, the body of existing laws were continued, unless they
conflicted with the reconstruction acts. But military tribunals were
freely created for various kinds of crimes. They were
supported by soldiers who supplanted sheriffs and con-
stables in making arrests and executing military decisions.
Some of the military governors admitted negroes to the
jury, a radical innovation in civil government. Much depended on the
personality of the military governor. He was strict or lenient as he
leaned toward or away from the ideals of the radicals. Sickles, Ord,
and Sheridan were of the former tendency. The course of General
Sheridan brought protests from Southerners and moderate men in
the North. He was severe in arresting persons charged with violence
and was tactless as an administrator. The fifth district under his
charge seemed turning to despair, and in November, 1867, he was
succeeded by General Hancock, who changed his policy. The radicals
in congress arraigned Johnson for removing Sheridan, asserting that
he gave the district over to lawlessness. The men who lived in the
district denied the allegation. Everywhere in the South
there was more individual violence than in normal times,
It was the time when negro suffrage was being put into Lawless?
operation in the face of the dissent of most of the white
people. It is not surprising if they expressed their opposition by
strenuous words or deeds; and it was to be expected that persons
wanted for such actions had free aid of their neighbors in escaping.
But there was no serious violence. There were, at the period, only
19,320 federal troops in the South, and they were enough to preserve
order. They were distributed in 134 posts in the ten states. Leav-
ing out of consideration the large, unsettled part of Texas, this was one
post for 4500 square miles. A well-manned constabulary for such a
region would be as large.
Within the realm of politics the Southerners were keen to get any
possible advantage from the system devised by their opponents.
Their first maneuver came at the registration, where each
applicant must swear he had not voluntarily served the
confederacy. They had their own interpretation of the
word " voluntarily," and a Southern jury must sit in a trial for per-
jury. Spite of the law of July 19 making registration officers judges
624 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
of applications to register, a large portion of the whites got their
names on the lists. The blacks were also freely registered. By
October i, 1867, the registration was complete. In Virginia, North
Carolina, Georgia, and Texas the registered whites were more numer-
ous, although in Georgia the excess was small. Now appeared the
object of the large registration. The law said that a constitution to
be ratified must have a majority of the registered vote. The plan
of the whites was to swell the list as much as possible and to defeat
ratification at last by refusing to go to the polls. This plan surprised
the radicals in Washington but it did not benefit the South, for
when one state, Alabama, showed that the trick could be done, con-
gress amended the existing laws so as to allow a constitution to be
ratified by a majority of the votes cast.
The personnel of the constitutional conventions was respectable,
although most of them had negro members, that of South Carolina
having 63 out of a total of 97. There were usually com-
andcTi?0118 Petent white men> Southern and Northern born, to direct
stitutions. the proceedings, and the influence of the military governors
was exerted for good. The shrewd instigators of fraud
who dominated later events had not yet come into power. The re-
sulting constitutions accepted negro suffrage, as the reconstruction
laws required. Six of them placed temporary restrictions on the
suffrage of former confederates. Most of them provided for public
schools and adopted new features in the machinery of government
which experience has proved valuable.
By spring, 1868, most of the states had held their conventions,
and were preparing to take the sense of the people. At this time the
republicans in congress were alarmed lest, as recent elec-
ofcon***011 t*ons seemed to show, the country was turning to the
stitutions. democrats. They felt that the Southern states with the
negroes enfranchised would be republican in 1868 and
might be necessary in the presidential election. But the plan of the
Southern whites to defeat the constitutions stared them in the face.
The radicals in the house hurriedly passed the bill to allow ratifica-
tion by the majority of the votes cast, thus depriving congressional
reconstruction of the last pretext that it was the free action of the
people of the states. It was a bitter pill for the moderate republican
senators, who had systematically contended that a state's will should
be respected. They delayed the bill until the news came from Ala-
bama. Here the registration was about 170,000, and the vote was
70,812 for, and 1005 against, ratification. The senate hesitated no
longer: the bill passed and congressional reconstruction was saved.
The election which had been held in Alabama was now pronounced
sufficient, and that state, with North and South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Arkansas, and Louisiana, all of which had ratified their
constitutions, were received into the union. Three states remained
THE UNION COMPLETED
625
unreconstructed, Texas, Mississippi, and Virginia. The constitu-
tions framed in the two last disfranchised former confederates, and
for this reason Virginia delayed ratification, while Mississippi rejected
it outright. The situation appealed to the sympathies of Grant,
who became president March 4, 1869, and in April he suggested that
the two states vote on their constitutions with separate votes on dis-
franchisement. Congress agreed, and the constitutions without dis-
franchisement were promptly ratified. In 1870 the three states were
received into full fellowship and the union was again complete. As a
state was restored, its military governor was replaced by a governor
chosen under the new constitution, and he, with a legislature similarly
selected, took control of the state's affairs. The federal troops, how-
ever, were not withdrawn for some time.
With negro suffrage in force, most of the states became radical,
but in Georgia the conservatives got control of the legislature, al-
though the governor was a radical. They showed a poor
sense of caution by acting at once against their enemies. Military
They expelled the 27 negro members of their body on the Regg^ent
ground that while negro suffrage was legal the constitu- iishe(j in
tion did not grant blacks the right to hold office, and Georgia.
they gave the seats to the white opponents of the evicted
ones. Such a step could not fail to bring down on Georgia all the
wrath of the Northern radicals. Congress promptly declined to
admit the two Georgia senators just chosen, and after some months
of hesitation restored military rule with General Terry for governor.
He acted vigorously, expelling 24 democrats from the legislature on
the ground that they were disfranchised by the fourteenth amend-
ment. He filled their places with republicansNand the excluded negro
members were restored. Georgia, thus disciplined, was admitted again
into the union, July 15, 1870. The rash action of the conservatives
had no other result than to convince the North that the South would
evade reconstruction whenever they could.
August n, 1868, when his plans were coming into full realization,
died Thaddeus Stevens in his 77th year. Bitter hater and hard fighter
as he was, he received equal hatred and hostility from
his foes. Neither his public nor private conduct was gtcvens
exempt from attack. But all agree that he was a great
parliamentary leader, and that he controlled history-making events
in one of the great crises of our history. He had, also, his ideals,
although they sometimes seemed obscured by the smoke of battle;
and one of them was confidence in the capacity of the negro race.
By his own direction he was buried in an humble cemetery at Lan-
caster, Pennsylvania, with an inscription above him which read :
"I repose in this quiet and secluded spot, not from any natural pref-
erence for solitude, but, finding other cemeteries limited as to race
by charter rules, I have chosen this, that I might illustrate in my
28
626 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
death the principles which I advocated through a long life, Equality
of Man before his Creator." This spirit filled his reconstruction
policy.
Negro suffrage was now adopted in the South, but the methods of
adoption were such as to throw some doubt on its constitutionality.
But, that aside, it was evident that once the present
Fifteenth crisis was Past and the whites again in control in the
Amendment. South, negro suffrage would be stricken from the state
constitutions. To prevent this, congress resorted to a
fifteenth amendment, and such a step was, in fact, necessary to save
what had been done. As passed by congress February 27, 1869, it
read: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not
be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account
of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." It was accepted
by the states, and promulgated March 30, 1870. In the debate on
the amendment some members of congress desired to insert education
and property holding after the term " previous condition of servitude,"
but they were not heeded. Senator Morton, speaking for the dis-
appointed ones, predicted that the day would come when the South
would disfranchise the negro by imposing educational and property
qualifications.
The radicals had now done all they could to carry out their plan.
They had throttled the mass of Southern whites, established negro
suffrage through military force, and adopted two consti-
Th<j. tutional amendments to make fast what had been gained.
Phin^on There was nothing left but to turn over the Southern
Trial. states to the incompetents they chose to call "truly loyal"
and see if they could build up peace and prosperity in the
land of desolation. The task seems now unreasonable enough, but
the men of 1869 contemplated it without apparent concern.
The failure of the plan was due to: Ji. the growing weariness of
Northern people of the eternal "Southern problem." Their enthu-
. siasm had its limits, and they began to feel sympathy for
Failed ^e victims of congressional theorizers. They also lost
some of their interest in the elevation of the negro ; 2. The
prevalence of fraud and incompetency of the new governments in the
South ; 3. The increasing confidence of the South that it could manage
the situation in its own way; 4. The deterioration of the Southern
republican party itself by which the more respectable carpet-baggers
and Southern whites were forced to give way to corrupt men; and
5. The rise of the Ku Klux Klan, a secret and violent organization
which struck at the activity of the negroes and their white leaders
and paralyzed their worst efforts, while it gave courage to the whites
and showed them how to neutralize negro suffrage.
UNION LEAGUE AND KU KLUX KLAN 627
THE Ku KLUX KLAN
The Southerners contended that the Klan was organized to counter-
act the Union League, a secret organization which gave the negro
solidarity and, it was claimed, encouraged him to commit
acts of violence. The league originated in the North in
1862 to support the cause of union when democrats were
attacking the war policy of the republicans. It was secret,
and its members swore to vote for none but union men for office.
It did good service until the end of the war, when it was mostly aban-
doned, but survived in some places chiefly as local social organiza-
tions. Late in the war it was extended to the South among union
men there, who were generally whites. With the coming of peace
negro members began to be admitted. At first they were but few,
but they increased in numbers as negro suffrage became more prob-
able. The conservative white members now withdrew, and the
organization became a mass of blacks controlled by white men. Its
influence was probably never great, but the whites, always alarmed
at anything which might lead to an insurrection of the blacks, looked
upon it with horror. There were many evidences of self-assertion by
the negroes. Houses and barns were burned, men were waylaid, and
other evidences showed a new spirit in a people long noted for their
submissiveness. Friends of the blacks asserted that the whites prac-
ticed numerous outrages upon the freedmen. It is hard to place
the responsibility where it belongs, but it is well to remember that
violence begets violence, and that social chaos was great in 1867.
Whether justified or not, the whites regarded the organization of
blacks into the Union League as inimical to good order and security.
Several organizations are known under the general term Ku Klux
Klan ; the " Knights of the White Camelia," chiefly in the Gulf states,
" Constitutional Union Guards," "Pale Faces," the
" White Brotherhood," the "Council of Safety," and the
"Association of '76," as well as the Klan proper. They Klux Klan.
were alike in purpose, organization, and methods, and the
last only will be described. It originated in Pulaski, Tennessee,
where some young men had a mirth-making circle which held its
ludicrous initiations in an abandoned house. The name " Ku Klux "
came from the Greek Kuklos, circle, and "Klan" was added for
alliteration. The Pulaski negroes were frightened by lights and the
sounds of laughter in a house they thought haunted, and the mem-
bers, observing the fact, sought to heighten the effect by circulating
the story that the house was visited by the ghosts of dead confederates
.who were concerned at the turbulence of their former slaves. Then
they had a mounted parade, each horse with muffled hoofs so that he
walked noiselessly over the ground and horse and rider fantastically
disguised. The houses of aggressive negroes were visited, but the
628 RECONSTRUCTION— THE SOUTHERN SIDE
object at this time was only to frighten the occupants. It was well
accomplished for a while, and many other communities organized
Klans. The mirth-making purpose now disappeared, and serious men
took the direction. The negroes soon knew the visitors were not
ghosts, although the disguises were so excellent that none but the ini-
tiated knew who wore them. Absolute secrecy, obedience, and loyalty
were required of members. The Pulaski movement spread rapidly
and far. It was, it seems, the precursor of the other organizations
named. As ghostly fear no longer had weight with the persons visited,
whipping, tar and feathers, and even maiming was resorted to. It
was the aim of the Klan to punish no one without deliberation and a
formal decision by the Klan under the direction of a sober leader;
but there were many turbulent members, and violence and cruelty
were not always restrained. Negroes were whipped freely before
emancipation, and the community felt that unmanageable blacks
might still be whipped in moderation. White men who had in-
fluence with the blacks were visited, sometimes tarred and feathered,
and sometimes ordered to leave the neighborhood. The Ku Klux
claimed these were visited because they incited the blacks to out-
rages ; but as the visited ones were generally republicans and active
in politics it was plausibly alleged that they were dealt with for
political reasons.
The Pulaski movement began in 1866. It had reached remote
regions when the reconstruction acts of 1867 were passed. The
Southerners saw in the movement a means of opposing
the iron hand laid on them. Their most prominent leaders
took it up, and a secret meeting in Nashville, in April,
1867, brought it under a strongly concentrated system, held together
by implicit military obedience. Thus was established the " In visible
Empire," presided over by the Grand Wizard and his ten Genii.
Each state became a "Realm" under a Grand Dragon and his eight
Officers Hydras, each congressional district a " Dominion" under a
Grand Titan and his six Furies, and each local group was
a "Den" under a Grand Cyclops and his two Nighthawks. It was
the Den that did the actual work for which the "Invisible Empire"
existed. It assembled ordinarily in the woods and at night — its
members swore to march when summoned "at any time of the moon."
It decided whom it would punish, but was enjoined to visit no man
without first giving him warning to change his conduct.
The notices affected an illiterate style for the sake of dis-
guise. They were usually posted in the night, and were of a nature
to strike terror to the recipient. One never knew the members, and
dared not criticize the things done lest he be speaking to a member and
himself incur vengeance. One never knew how many members of a
jury to try a Ku Klux case belonged to the Klan. Its visitations became
more severe in time, and death was sometimes executed against a person
THE KLAN DISSOLVED 629
especially obnoxious to the Klan. Its silent, swift, and thorough
methods brought a subdued calm to the negroes and their white
leaders, and relieved the apprehension of the rest of the people.
Spite of its formal centralization, the real power of the Klan was
with the Den, the local unit ; and the Dens easily fell into excesses.
They were composed of venturesome persons, generally
young men, drawn from all classes in the community. Of
If the Cyclops had strong character and was judicious he
might restrain harsh conduct. If he himself was rash or weak-willed,
the violent members were apt to prevail. If such members got con-
trol in a Den, the moderate men would withdraw. Symptoms like
these did not appear at first, and throughout 1867 and 1868 the
organization met the purpose of its founders. But by the beginning
of 1869 rashness was evidently increasing, and the men at the head
of the organization ordered the dissolution of the * Invisible Em-
pire." Their order was not effective. Everywhere members with-
drew, glad to escape without being considered traitors, but the Dens
did not dissolve. They remained more than ever in the hands of the
rasher element. The more thoughtful Southerners now began to fear
lest the deeds of the Klan bring a federal army down on them.
The elections of 1870 naturally occasioned much excitement, and
probably increased the activity of the Ku Klux. Stories of outrages
were widely published in the North, and April 20, 1871,
congress passed the Ku Klux act. It authorized the interferes
president to suspend the writ of habeas corpus in order to
deal with secret conspiracies, and it enlarged the power of the federal
courts. At the same time a committee of congress was appointed
to investigate "affairs in the late insurrectionary states." Sub-
committees visited the South, took a mass of evidence, and published
it in twelve volumes. The full ventilation of the situation worked
good results North and South. It brought home to the Ku Klux
members the danger of interference from the North, and supported
so powerfully those who wished to dissolve the Klan that the organiza-
tion was now generally abandoned.
Besides its immediate effect in restraining the blacks and lending
courage to the whites, the Ku Klux Klan showed how the whites
could control the future. Its weakness was that by em-
ploying violence it might bring in federal troops. It was ^Ce^v0ef~ the
soon seen that violence was unnecessary. The negro is °
docile by nature and easily frightened ; and for all his
childish love of political campaigning he was not devoted to the exer-
cise of the franchise. Open demonstrations, threats delivered per-
sonally, and many other forms of intimidation which fell short of
violence would serve well enough to keep him from the polls, and
involve no conflict with federal authority. This lesson, so evident in
the experience of the Ku Klux, was well learned and boldly followed
630 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
after 1870. Its exact methods were left to the ingenuity of individual
managers, with the one condition that whatever was done must stop
short of bodily harm. Bands of mounted men with rifles attended
political speakings, both democratic and republican, observed the
utterances of speakers, spread consternation among the negroes, and
boasted openly that the South was a "white man's country." They
frequently had the sympathy of the federal garrisons, whose duty was
to repress disorder. They usually convinced the negroes that it was
wise to eschew political activity.
The republican leaders complained that these demonstrations broke
the ability of those leaders to bring out the colored vote. They well
knew the object of their opponents, but could meet the
Connected emergency in no other way than to call on the president
Politics. f°r troops. When union soldiers surrounded the polls the
negroes would vote, and not otherwise. Soldiers could not
be sent to every voting precinct. Whenever they were sent, the demo-
crats charged that they were the means of enforcing fraud, and they
challenged the government to show what violence had been com-
mitted to warrant their use. They denounced the Ku Klux act of
1871 and federal election laws which congress enacted to enable the
troops to be called out, as cumulative evidence of the tendency of
the republicans to destroy self-government and to perpetuate mili-
tary rule. In the execution of its Southern policy the government
felt also that it was necessary to control the election machinery
through boards to register the voters, count the votes, and canvass
the returns. All this machinery fell naturally into the hands of the
dominant party, usually the republicans. Whoever exercised it, their
opponents pronounced the returns fraudulent. In the cataclysm
of political institutions the spirit of legality had forsaken the people,
and it is probable that each party committed fraud as opportunity
offered. In former times the South had been proud of its freedom
from political corruption, but its respectable people now considered
anything justifiable in order to meet a condition they found tyran-
nical and intolerable.
TRIUMPH OF THE SOUTHERN DEMOCRATS
The Southern tactics were sufficient against anything but a vast
army of occupation, and the South believed the North would not take
up that task lightly. The democrats were the men of
Weakness property, courage, and intelligence. The republicans had
Southern organized a party of which none of these qualities could
Republicans, be expected. They were in power, not of their own ca-
pacity, but through extraneous force. Moreover, it was
notorious that they used power to enrich themselves and levied
burdensome taxes which must fall on the whites in order to support
NORTH CAROLINA DISORDERS 631
schemes of plunder. They were incompetent as a party, they threw
aside in the haste for gain the respect of the community, and they
could not hope to maintain their power when the North grew tired of
sending troops to support them. During the years 1871 to 1877 they
lost state after state, and passed out of authority completely dis-
credited.
Their most notable early defeat was in Georgia. Governor Bul-
lock, a republican, was, on investigation, pronounced honest by a
democratic jury, but the republican legislature committed JQ Qeor
many extravagances. In 1870 the democrats carried the
legislature, and there was talk of impeachment. The governor dared
not trust himself in the hands of his enemies, and resigned and left
the state. During the two years of his administration the state's
debt rose from six to eighteen millions and credit fell so low that
bonds were no longer salable. In January, 1872, the democrats
chose a successor to Bullock and the republican regime was definitely
over. The triumph of the democracy was largely due to the efforts
of B. H. Hill, formerly a whig, but now forced into the solid white
man's party by the changed issues of the day.
In the North Carolina legislature corruption had, probably, its
strongest footing. A ring was organized under the direction of
carpet-baggers and scalawags which is said to have col-
lected ten per cent commission on all money appropriated.
Railroads were incorporated or extended through the
liberal issue of state bonds until the public debt was increased by
$27,000,000, and the taxes became four times as heavy as in 1860.
The state house, formerly the scene of intelligent discussion, was
filled by a crowd of white and black nonentities. Men formerly slaves
now had eight dollars a day as legislators, and did the will of the rings ters
who raised them to the seventh heaven of delight by means of cham-
pagne dinners and many small pilferings. Every conceivable oppor-
tunity was made to yield money, and even the appointment of West
Point cadets was for sale. The situation aroused the united effort
of the whites in 1870, and a democratic assembly was the result.
The governor was W. W. Holden, whom Johnson made provisional
governor in 1865 and who was chosen under radical rule in 1868.
He was not concerned in the frauds practiced in the legis-
lature, but he gave mortal offense in another way. There Holden's
was some disorder, and in 1870 a prominent republican J^J^Q °
politician was brutally murdered, probably by the Ku Law.
Klux. As it was impossible to punish the murderers in
the courts, Holden, who under a recent state law had suspended the
writ of habeas corpus, proclaimed martial law in two counties, called
in federal troops, and arrested nearly a hundred prominent citizens,
most of whom could not have been present at the murder. They
were taken on the charge of plotting against the peace of the state.
632 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
They were held in defiance of the state courts, but released by a
federal judge who granted a writ of habeas corpus under the four-
teenth amendment. Holden submitted to the federal courts. The
incident added to his unpopularity, and the assembly chosen in the
same year was democratic by nearly two-thirds majority. It met
full of resentment, impeached the governor, and in March, 1871,
removed him from office. He was not convicted for fraud, but for
the military arrest of citizens. The reconstruction bonds were repu-
diated by the legislature and still remain unpaid.
Virginia escaped the fate of her neighbors through her delay in
ratifying her constitution and through the large majority of the white
population. The people were aroused by the corruption
Virginia, south of them, and in the first election under the restora-
and'rexas' ^on> ^69, chose a conservative governor, Gilbert C.
1870. Walker. One other state, Tennessee, was carried by the
conservatives in 1870. It fell under republican con-
trol after the enfranchisement of the negroes, but a short experience
with incompetency brought it back to the democracy. Texas accom-
plished its redemption in 1872.
In the five states mentioned were more whites than blacks, and the
triumph of the former was comparatively easy. It was otherwise
in the Black Belt. Alabama did not reach its depth of
Alabama, corruption until 1874. In that year the public debt had
and^s8' r*sen ^rom seven to nearly thirty-three millions, and the
sissippir whites were aroused to action. They used the ordinary
1874-1875. means of neutralizing the negro vote, but were careful
to stop short of actual violence. Grant sent a small
body of troops, but the people worked cautiously and vigor-
ously. They were encouraged by the knowledge that Arkansas
and Mississippi were also moving. The result was that all three
accomplished their ends, although the last-named succeeded only in
1875. The struggle in Mississippi was fierce, and many negroes were
killed. Grant, when appealed to, refused to send troops, saying,
"The whole public are tired out with these annual autumnal outbreaks
in the South." The elections of 1874 had gone strongly democratic
throughout the North, and Grant was not the only man in his party
who saw in it disapproval of the party's Southern policy. Left to
themselves, the Mississippians took courage. Never before in this
Southern struggle was intimidation so well organized or
carr^ so far- Bands of armed men marched everywhere,
saying openly that they would kill the negroes if that was
necessary, in order to show that Mississippi was a "white
man's country." Their work was well done, for though the republi-
cans had a normal majority of 20,000 the democrats in 1875 carried
the election by 30,000, had a large majority in the legislature, and
controlled most of the counties. The election itself, however, was
THREE CLASSES OF REPUBLICANS 633
held without the least violence. "The Mississippi Plan" was a term
used after this to denote the general Southern method of dealing with
the negro vote. When the presidential election of 1876 came,
only three Southern states, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida
remained in republican control. In this year each
struggled sternly for liberation, and in each the re-
suit was disputed. The democrats had the whole white Louisiana,
population with them, and would take the government, and Florida.
they claimed, if federal troops did not oppose them.
Hayes, for reasons discussed later in this book (see page 694), withdrew
the troops, and thus in 1877 republican rule disappeared in the South.
NATIONAL RECONSTRUCTION UNDER GRANT
When Stevens died in 1868, his leadership on Southern matters
fell to Benjamin F. Butler, who lacked the singleness of purpose of
his predecessor. He was wholly for the party organiza-
tion, and won personal influence over Grant. He valued {ne^1a^nt
the South for the republican votes it would cast in congress, ingt0n.
and wished to perpetuate the party control there. He had
many followers in Washington, but other republicans, among them
the more liberal minded men, like senators Schurz and Trumbull,
realized the incompetence of the negro and were no longer willing to
force bad government on the South in order to maintain negro suffrage.
Still a third class believed the negro was voting badly, but they thought
using the ballot educative and wished the process continued. The
second group soon split with Butler, but he usually had the support
of the third, and the republican majority until 1875 was so great
that he had his way in the house. In the senate, his views were voiced
by O. P. Morton, of Indiana, abler than Butler, but altogether a
partisan. Sumner should be placed in the third group. He was
sincere but theoretical, and until his death in 1874, lost no opportunity
to urge measures in behalf of the freedmen. Grant was usually mild
toward the South, but he loved order, and Butler won him
with the tales of Southern outrages. He could never see
a politician's tricks. The result of all this was that the
president and the majority in congress combined to pass several
coercive acts to execute the radical plan of reconstruction.
The first of these, the enforcement act of 1870, was passed to enforce
the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments. It forbade a state to
abridge suffrage on the ground of race, color, or servi-
tude and it asserted the power of the federal government
to correct such abridgment if it occurred. It added
to the radical interest in the bill that the machinery of
enforcement was like that of the fugitive slave act of 1850. In
1875 the supreme court declared the essential features of the act
634 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
unconstitutional on the ground that the fourteenth amendment
merely restricted the states in passing certain laws, and that it did
not take from the state the function of protecting the rights of indi-
viduals. The second was the Ku Klux act of 1871, giving the presi-
dent power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus and to enter a state
to suppress disorder. In 1882 the supreme court rendered null
the essential parts of this act also. A third was the civil rights act
of 1875, to secure to negroes equal privileges in hotels, theaters,
railway carriages, and other public utilities. Sumner, who died a
year before it passed, had it much at heart and wished to include
churches, schools, and cemeteries ; but congress would not go that
far, although the passage of the act at this time was undoubtedly
secured as a kind of tribute to his faithfulness. This law was also
declared unconstitutional, 1883, the ground being that it dealt with
social and not civil rights. A fourth bill failed of enactment, 1874.
It was a force bill, and proposed to give the president for two years
the power to suspend habeas corpus in Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas,
and Mississippi, in order to enforce the war amendments. It passed
the house, but failed in the senate. In these four acts the radical
majority under Butler and Morton sought to give their theories of
reconstruction a vigorous application at the expense of the authority
of the state. They were checked because the coujt believed the
state's authority was guaranteed by the federal constitution.
They fared better in their desire to control the elections. In 1871
a second enforcement act was passed. It placed elections of repre-
sentatives under federal control, gave federal judges power
Elections to aPP°int supervisors under certain conditions, and
authorized the United States marshals to appoint enough
deputies to insure order at the polls. It was to be enforced in
any state when demanded by a specified number of citizens. It
was designed for the South, but was resorted to in large Northern
cities where the democrats were strong by reason of immigrant voters.
The democrats succeeded in repealing the vital part of the law during
Hayes's administration; and most of the rest was rescinded in 1894,
with parts of the first enforcement act (1870).
The severity of these acts aroused protests in the North. The
liberal republican movement of 1871 threatened to disrupt the
party, and one of their grievances was the Southern policy
Inmost adopted. Grant and Butler felt the trend of public
ACt. opinion and sought to neutralize it by an act of grace to
former confederates who by the fourteenth amendment
were excluded from office until pardoned by a two-thirds vote of each
house. It is true that since 1868 congress had removed the dis-
abilities of 4600 persons individually, but about 160,000 were still
excluded. The annual message of 1871 recommended general amnesty
to all except the most prominent confederates. A bill was introduced
THE COURT CHECKS CONCENTRATION 635
to that end, but it was opposed by Sumner unless his civil rights
bill was incorporated as an amendment. The senate hesitated, but
in May, 1872, voted down the amendment, and the bill passed both
houses and became law. It was estimated that the persons in the
classes still excluded were not more than 500. Many of these were
later restored by special act, and in 1898 a general amnesty law in-
cluded all who were still unpardoned. The act of 1872 undoubtedly
benefited the Southern democrats, but it softened animosity on
both sides. Two years later a chivalrous act from the other side
gave additional impulse to good feeling. March u,
1874, Charles Sumner died. He was long the champion i;a!nar'8
f a j-i L Eulogy on
of negro sunage and an extreme radical ; yet he was honest Sumner.
and fair-minded with Southern men personally. A month
after his death Lamar, of Mississippi, delivered in the house a eulogy
which gave full justice to Sumner as a man, and expressed the loftiest
desire for a united country. He was a good orator, imaginative and
emotional, and he was in earnest. He carried the house with him ;
and both the North and South felt drawn together when his speech
was published. The amnesty act and L<amar's burning eloquence
were the dawn of the day of reconciliation.
INTERPRETING THE WAR AMENDMENTS
We have seen that during Johnson's administration the supreme
court hesitated to decide whether congress or the state had the right
to supervise reconstruction, in the cases of Mississippi v. .
Johnson, Georgia v. Stanton, and ex parte McCardle citizenship
(page 611). Its reticence was undoubtedly due to an
unwillingness to interfere in the quarrel between the legislature and
the executive. After the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amend-
ments were adopted, the court could no longer hesitate to give its
views. There was little controversy over the thirteenth amendment,
which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, or over the fifteenth,
which conferred the suffrage, or over the second, third, fourth, and fifth
sections of the fourteenth, which dealt respectively with apportion-
ment, disfranchisement of former confederates, the validity of the
confederate debt, and the power to enforce the amendment. But
the first section demanded much interpretation. It ran:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the juris-
diction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they
reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges
or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any
person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The reconstruction era was a period of centralization, and it
seems certain that many who approved this amendment thought it
636 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
took under national authority most of the negro's "rights and im-
munities." In that view it was a long stride toward nationalism.
Such persons were, therefore, hardly prepared for several decisions which
gave it restricted application and saved large areas of state autonomy.
The first decision interpreting the amendments, was given in the
slaughter-house cases, 1873. A chartered Louisiana company had
the exclusive right to kill and dress live stock in New
houscfcases Orleans, and other butchers in the city must use its plant,
paying fees not greater than a specified maximum. An
attempt to annul the charter was lost in the state courts and appeal
was taken to the federal supreme court, where it was urged that the
slaughter-house company was unlawful because it infringed the long-
established rights of the independents to their labor and their property.
The reply of the court to this was avowedly explicit. It pointed
out (i) the amendment recognized two kinds of citizenship, state and
federal, and the privileges under each were distinct,
Decision (2) ^he state was prohibited from infringing the privileges
of federal, but not those of its own, citizenship, (3) the
privileges under state citizenship were wide before the passage of the
amendment, they remained with the state except so far as by this
amendment they were transferred to the nation, and it was not
intended to "constitute this court a perpetual censor upon all legis-
lation of the states, on the civil rights of their own citizens," and (4)
the regulation of slaughter-houses was a state privilege and subject
to state control. The court would not now define privileges under
federal citizenship, but among them were such as grew out of the very
nature of the federal government, such as were specifically granted in
the constitution, and the right of exemption from slavery. The
amendment, said the court in this and many other decisions, must
be interpreted by the occasion out of which it arose. It was passed
to protect the freedmen from well-known state laws denying equal
privileges to them as a class : it was corrective of this wrong rather
than creative of rights anew. This was essentially true of that clause
forbidding a state to deny equality: "We doubt very much," ran
the decision, "whether any action of a state not directed by way of
discrimination against the negroes as a class, or on account of their
race, will ever he held to come within the purview of this provision.
It is so clearly a provision for that race and that emergency, that a
strong case would be necessary for its application to any other."
Opponents of the prevalent tendencies to concentration found
much satisfaction in this clear limitation of the most far-
tiontrallZa" reacm'ng phase of the reconstruction lawmaking. Under
Checked. other conditions it might have been given a meaning
much more hostile to state autonomy. Theories of nation-
alism grew out of the earnest struggle against the state's right
to control the status of the freedmen. The occasion for their use
CIVIL RIGHTS DEFINED 637
being past, many people who had tolerated them now hoped they
would be forgotten. To them there was something of the charm of
other days when the court plainly approved the wisdom of preserving
the states "with powers for domestic and local government, including
the regulation of civil rights, the rights of person and property."
And when the court expressed its purpose to hold "with a steady and
an even hand the balance between state and federal power," it seemed
that the long course of federal aggression on the power of the states
had at last come to a turning point. In this sense the decision in
the slaughter-house cases deserves to rank in importance with the
constitutional decisions of John Marshall.
It had another bearing too significant in the future to be ignored
here. It was argued that the New Orleans slaughter-house company
was a monopoly and against the spirit of the English law. The
doctrine was rejected. "Whenever a Legislature," said the court,
"has the right to accomplish a certain result, and that result is best
attained by means of a corporation, it has the right to create such
a corporation and to endow it with the powers necessary to effect
the desired and lawful purpose."
Seven years later the supreme court gave another important inter-
pretation of the first clause of the fourteenth amendment in three
decisions on the negro's right to serve on juries. This
was a political right, necessary to insure to a negro de- ™eh^e^° s
fendant a trial by his peers. It depended on the clause julyt etc
forbidding a state to deny equality before the law. In
three cases it was held by the court that if a state in its law ex-
cluded negroes from the jury, it violated the amendment, if a state
law admitted negroes to jury duty, but the officers who made
up the list refused after application to place the names of colored
people on the lists, then also the amendment was violated, for the
officer was constructively the state which he represented. But
if the state law admitted negroes to the jury and a negro prisoner
were convicted by a white jury, no protest being made before the
jury lists were made out, the convicted negro was not the object of
discrimination by a state, and the amendment was not violated.
Exclusion from juries was one of the objectionable features of the
new black code of 1865-1866, to remedy which the fourteenth
amendment was enacted ; and the court now gave its formal notice
that this remedy must be enforced.
The civil rights cases (1883) were more conspicuous than these
others, because they overset a law long debated in congress before
enactment ; but they were simpler from a legal standpoint.
The act of 1875 m two important sections guaranteed to Cases/g ts
negroes the right to entertainment in inns, admission
to theaters, and equal privileges in public conveyances. Several
cases came before the court at once, and the decision was made to
638 RECONSTRUCTION — THE SOUTHERN SIDE
apply to all. The petitioners — they were all colored people —
urged that the statute of 1875 was violated. The decision recalled
the words of the fourteenth amendment that "no stat^ ; shall abridge
the privileges of a citizen of the United States. Now no state action
was alleged in the cases before the court or contemplated in the act
of 1875. Moreover, it was clear that before the war amendments
were made, congress had no authority over the rights of private
individuals in inns, etc. ; and since such a right was not conferred
in these amendments, it was not conferred at all. The civil rights
act was, therefore, void in the clauses concerned.
But the court would not say that these sections of the act were
inoperative in the District of Columbia and in the territories; and
it intimated that by its control over commerce congress might have
the right to regulate the accommodations of negroes in interstate
travel. Section 4 of the act, which guaranteed negroes the right
to serve on juries, was about the only feature which survived this
decision.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Many of the references for the preceding chapter are useful for the subjects treated
in this, especially the general works and some of the biographies. In addition,
the following relate to Southern reconstruction generally: Herbert, edr., Why the
Solid South? (1890), full of feeling and politically biased, but containing important
facts; Brown, The Lower South (1902); Taylor, Destruction and Reconstruction
(1879); Bancroft, The Negro in Politics (Columbia University, 1885); articles on
various reconstruction phases in the Atlantic Monthly, 1891 ; Lester and Wilson,
The Ku Klux Klan, Us Origin, etc., Fleming, edr. (1905) ; Peirce, The Freedmen's
Bureau (University of Iowa Studies, 1904) ; and Williams, History of the Negro
Race in America, 2 vols. (1883).
Several valuable monographs bearing on reconstruction in the several states
have been prepared under the direction of Professor Dunning. They are : Fleming,
Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama (1905) ; Garner, Reconstruction in Missis-
sippi (1901) ; Woolley, Reconstruction in Georgia (Columbia Studies, 1901) ; Hamil-
ton, Reconstruction in North Carolina (Ibid., 1906) ; and Ramsdell, Reconstruction
in Texas (Ibid., 1910). See also: Hollis, Early Reconstruction Period in South
Carolina (Johns Hopkins Studies, 1905), inadequate; Eckenrode, Virginia during
Reconstruction (Ibid., 1904), useful but not sufficiently full; Fertig, Secession and
Reconstruction of Tennessee (University of Chicago, 1896) ; Reynolds, Reconstruction
in South Carolina (1905), has Southern bias; Allen, Governor Chamberlain's Ad-
ministration (1888) ; and Harrell, The Brooks and Baxter War (1893).
Conditions in the South attracted universal attention just after the war, and
many newspapers published letters from correspondents there. Numerous books
were also published, among them the following : Andrews, The South Since the War
(1866) ; Trowbridge, The South (1866) ; Pike, The Prostrate State (1874), a vivid
picture of misrule in South Carolina; King, The Great South (1875); Ried, After
the War (1866) ; Nordhoff, The Cotton States vn 1875 (1876) ; Somers, The Southern
States since the War (1871). See also Schurz Report (Sen. Ex. Docs., 39 con. i
sess., No. 2) and the Truman Report (Ibid., No. 43), both valuable : to the former is
appended the short report of General Grant. Interesting pictures are found in :
Tourgee, A Fool's Errand, by One of the Fools (ed. 1880), a novel by an observant
carpet-bagger : Page, Red Rock (1898), a good companion story from the Southern
standpoint; and Morgan, Yazoo, or the Picket Line of Freedom (1884).
Biographies of Southern men are : Smedes, Memorials of a Southern Planter
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
639
(1900) ; Hamilton, edr., Correspondence of Jonathan Worth, 2 vols. (No. Car. Hist.
Commission, Publications, 1909), most valuable for political condition in North
Carolina; Boyd, edr., Memoirs of W. W. Holden (Trinity College, 1911); Mayes,
Lucius Q. C. Lamar (1896) ; Fielder, Life of Joseph E. Brown (1883) ; Hill, Life of
Benjamin H. Hill (1893) ; Pendleton, Alexander H. Stephens (1907) ; Johnston and
Brown, Life of Alexander H . Stephens (1878) ; Dodd, Je/erson Davis (1907) ; Trent,
William Gilmore Simms (1892) ; and Perry, Reminiscences, 2 vols. (1883-1889).
For Independent Reading
Mrs. Pryor, Reminiscences of Peace and War (1904) ; Mrs. Clay, A Belle of the
Fifties (1904) ; Trent, William Gilmore Simms (1892) ; Mrs. Avary, Dixie after
the War (1906) ; Tourgee, A Fool's Errand (ed. 1880) ; and Page, Red Rock (1898).
CHAPTER XXX
PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
POLITICAL CONDITIONS AFTER THE WAR
HAVING outlived the platform on which it was founded, the repub-
lican party in 1865 must get new issues. Radical reconstruction
furnished one and it proved very powerful, although
publicans. m *ts nature ^ was temporary. More permanent was
an alliance the party made with the business interests.
The war debt was a republican heritage. It was an instrument
of victory binding on the victors, and any suggestion of impairment
had their opposition. The democracy, the party of conservatism
in the fifties, now found itself supplanted by its opponents who, as
tariff and currency assumed more importance, became the party of
large capital, the friend of the commercial class, and the reliance of
protected manufacturers. Much of this was due to the peculiar
weakness of the democrats. They were discredited through opposi-
tion to the conduct of the war, and their defense of state
Democrats. rights impelled them to resist radical reconstruction.
They were a broken remnant of a former army, without
capable leaders, and embittered by years of the most caustic criticism.
They fought as they could against the Southern policy of the repub-
licans ; but they recognized the handicap it gave them, and willingly
adopted other issues. Thus it happened that they espoused in the
West financial doctrines the men of Jackson's time would have scorned,
and in every section resolved themselves into a party of expediency.
The loss of the South was a heavy blow. To build up a great party
out of such conditions as confronted the democrats was difficult, and
required time.
The confusion incident to party reorganization is shown in the four
conventions which met in 1866. The first (Philadelphia, August 14)
supported Johnson and was controlled by Seward and
others of the presidential group. Its supporters called
themselves national republicans, and delegates came from
the moderate men North and South, to show that both sections
would unite in a policy of reconciliation. The impression was good
at first, but soon after it adjourned came Johnson's "swinging-
around-the-circle " speeches, which with his growing unpopularity
made success impossible. The second convention was called by
Johnson's opponents to offset the first. It met in Philadelphia,
640
THE DEMOCRATS EMBARRASSED 641
September 3, and was composed of Southern loyalists and a few
Northern men. Its address urged the country to remember the
loyal men in the South who suffered through the policy of Johnson.
The third (Cleveland, September 17) was called by Johnson's friends.
It was composed chiefly of former soldiers and sailors, and sought to
rally these classes to the administration. The fourth (Pittsburgh,
September 25) was a great radical gathering, and indorsed the work
of congress. All of these conventions were planned as demonstra-
tions to influence the congressional elections.
The result showed how little Johnson was supported in the country.
Throughout the North the radicals controlled the party organization
and secured a stronger hold than ever in the house. TheResult
Delaware, Maryland, and Kentucky were carried by the
democrats, but the two other border states, West Virginia and Missouri,
were republican. The senate now had 42 republicans and n demo-
crats, and the house 143 republicans and 49 democrats. Thus vanished
Johnson's hope of a national conservative party committed to his
plan of reconstruction.
One incident tempered somewhat the violence of sectionalism.
In May, 1865, Jefferson Davis, president of the confederacy, was
captured and imprisoned in Fortress Monroe. He was
put into irons by order of the officer in charge, General JjjJjJ^11
N. A. Miles. This needless severity aroused great indigna- prison.
tion in the South, and the secretary of war ordered the
manacles removed four days after they were placed on the prisoner.
But Davis remained in prison for two years. He was much disliked
in the North, but by May, 1867, sentiment relented, and he was taken
before a federal judge on a writ of habeas corpus. He had been
detained for treason, but the judge declared this bailable, and he was
released on a bond of $100,000, Horace Greeley and other prominent
Northern men becoming sureties. His release gave pleasure to the
South. The confederate president was not popular with his own
people during the war, but his imprisonment, which he bore with
dignity and fortitude, brought him their affectionate esteem. In
1869 the case against him was discontinued, and he returned to Missis-
sippi, where he lived in retirement until his death in 1889.
THE ELECTION OF 1868
The local elections in 1867 brought anxiety to the republicans.
The democrats carried New York and Pennsylvania, and in Ohio
they reduced a large adverse majority to only 3000 while
they defeated a negro suffrage amendment by 50,000. Dominated
This result, seven months after the adoption of congres-
sional reconstruction, argued badly for the party in 1868. Fortu-
nately, safety was at hand in the person of a presidential candidate.
2T
642 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
May 20, a national republican convention nominated General Grant
for president and Schuyler Colfax for vice-president. Grant was not
a politician, and his early sympathy was democratic ; but his quarrel
with Johnson in 1867 threw him into the arms of the radicals. His
speech of acceptance struck a popular note in the expression, "Let
us have peace."
In the democratic convention, New York, July 4, were two promi-
nent candidates, both from Ohio. One was George H. Pendleton,
representative from the Cincinnati district, cultured and
Democrats we^ connected, and nicknamed "Gentleman George."
The other was Chief Justice Chase, who had a following
among those who opposed Pendleton's financial views. These views,
known as the "Ohio Idea," may be summed up as follows : The national
bonds were payable in "dollars," although the interest was to be paid
in gold. About $1,600,000,000 was in five-twenty bonds, and might,
therefore, soon begin to be redeemed. Pendleton desired to pay
them in "greenbacks," or legal tender, then much depreciated.
This would mean large issues of notes, but they would pay no interest,
thus effecting a saving to the government, and the resulting inflation
would please the debtor class, then large in Ohio and the states west
of it. The year 1867 brought a panic, and at such a time inflation
was apt to be popular. To pay the debt in gold, or to refund it
in gold bonds, said Pendleton, was to favor the Eastern capitalists
at the expense of the taxpayers, and he won many of the latter by his
battle-cry: "The same currency for the bondholder and the plow-
holder ! " The response was so strong in the West that the republicans
there dared not oppose it openly.
The Pendleton men wrote the platform of 1868, demanding (i) the
payment in currency of bonds not specifically payable in specie,
(2) taxation of national bonds, and (3) opposition to
radical reconstruction. The platform required a mere
majority vote, but to nominate a candidate a two-thirds
vote was necessary. The New York delegates led the Eastern
sentiment for conservative finance, and for two days no nominations
were made. Pendleton led on the first ballot and had 156^ out of
317 votes on the second. Two- thirds he could not get. Finally,
on the twenty-second ballot there was a stampede to Horatio Seymour,
of New York, chairman of the convention. He protested he would
not run, but the vote was unanimous, and he accepted. For vice-
president, Frank P. Blair, Jr., of Missouri, was selected. Nine
days earlier he had said in a letter immediately made public that the
carpet-bag regime in the South should be dispersed by the president
with armed force. His nomination under the circumstances was
indiscreet, and the republicans pointed to it to support their argu-
ment that the democrats contemplated violence. However wisely
the party may have acted, it had no chance against Grant. He had
NAPOLEON III AND MEXICO 643
214 to Seymour's 80 electoral votes and a plurality in the popular
vote of over 300,000.
FOREIGN AFFAIRS UNDER JOHNSON
If Johnson's domestic policy was full of disaster, his foreign policy
was on the whole successful. Although negotiations with England
were muddled through the incapacity of Reverdy Johnson (page 670),
affairs in Mexico were arranged with brilliant results for our prestige,
and in the purchase of Alaska we acquired at a fair price a most
valuable territory. In these matters the chief credit belongs to
Seward, although it should be remembered that the secretary had
the constant support of his superior.
In 1861, Napoleon III, under pretext of protecting European
creditors, sent an army to Mexico and found means to get a com-
plaisant Assembly of Notables to establish an empire
with Maximilian, brother of the Austrian ruler for emperor. T ^^h
The act violated the spirit of the Monroe doctrine, but
the United States, pressed to the limit by the civil war, could only
protest. The American people felt the affront very deeply and
demanded, with the coming of peace, the expulsion of the French
army from Mexico. Grant was of the same opinion, and sent Sheridan
with 52,000 troops to the Rio Grande. Napoleon was not inclined
to be forced, and war seemed possible. It was Seward's task to get
what we wanted without fighting for it. He restrained American
indignation on one hand, and by careful negotiations led up to a firm
demand upon the French emperor on the other. He succeeded so
well that April 5, 1866, Napoleon ordered his generals in Mexico
to make ready for withdrawal within a year and a half, because the
troops were needed in Europe. Maximilian was in dismay. He
had been promised five years' support: if he were now abandoned,
he would be crushed by the natives who held him for a usurper. His
touching appeals to Paris worked nothing. France did not care
for the Mexican scheme, and the emperor dared not incur the expense
of a war for it. It was by bringing this situation home to the French
government that Seward had his way. Left to his own resources,
the young Maximilian disdained to flee, and awaited his fate at the
hands of the infuriated Mexicans. They proclaimed a republic,
reoccupied the country, took him a prisoner, tried him by court-
martial, and shot him on June 19, 1867.
Seward's success in this incident was clouded somewhat by sympathy
for the unhappy Maximilian. In the purchase of Alaska there was
no such untoward feature. Russian America, with an
area of 577,390 square miles, had 10,000 white inhabitants
and many Indians in 1867. Its fur trade was valuable,
and fisheries on the southern coast were capable of rich develop-
644 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
ment. Russia found it too remote to govern well, and fearing it might
be seized by England, her minister was authorized to suggest to
Seward that she would sell it. The suggestion was quickly accepted,
and in one evening's interview the details were settled. The price
was to be $7,000,000, with $200,000 to quiet the claims of the Russian
American Company. The Russian minister suggested that the treaty
be prepared next day, but Seward exclaimed, "Why wait till
to-morrow, Mr. Stoeckl? Let us make the treaty to-night !" Then
clerks were summoned, Sumner, chairman of the senate committee
on foreign affairs, was called in, and at four o'clock in the morning
the treaty was signed. It went at once to the senate, where it created
much surprise ; but Sumner carried its adoption. In the house there
was more delay. The members needed time to realize why $7,000,000
should be paid for a frozen wilderness in the remote northwest. The
treaty was ratified, and on October u, 1867, Alaska was handed over.
The purchase was not popular when made, but time showed its
benefits.
GRANT'S POLITICAL MISTAKES
Grant's inauguration occasioned general joy, both because of his
popularity and because the turmoil of the Johnson period was over.
, But thoughtful men wondered if a military training
Cabinet fitted him for politics, and his first acts intensified their
doubts. He chose his cabinet of his own judgment,
as a military man might be expected to do, and two of them, E. R.
Hoar, attorney-general, and J. D. Cox, secretary of the interior,
were excellent selections. The others had not generally been consid-
ered eligible. Washburne, a man of respectable capacity, became
secretary of state, but resigned immediately to go to Paris as minister.
He was succeeded by Hamilton Fish, of New York, who was also
well chosen. For secretary of the treasury, an officer of the greatest
importance at that time, Grant nominated A. T. Stewart, a rich
merchant of New York. The nomination caused consternation,
but a law was discovered which forbade a merchant to hold the office.
Grant wished the law repealed, but congress refused, and he appointed
George S. Boutwell, of Massachusetts, a safe but not a brilliant,
financier. John A. Rawlins became secretary of war, A. E. Borie
secretary of the navy, and A. J. Creswell postmaster-general. Fish
hesitated to enter such a cabinet, but yielded to the requests of his
friends. He had influence with Grant, whose intentions were good,
and hoped to save him from manipulation by the politicians. He,
Hoar, and Cox made the best wing of the cabinet, but spite of their
efforts, Butler and his friends acquired predominant influence. Grant
was strong-willed and not easily moved. He smoked incessantly,
was fond of horses, and gave to the White House some of the free
atmosphere of the headquarters' tent. He was surrounded by men
GRANT'S POLITICAL MISTAKES
645
who had his weaknesses without his virtues, and through their machina-
tions the responsibilities of government were forgotten, and corruption
invaded many places.
He was most criticized for his Southern policy. His attitude toward
the South was originally lenient, but he yielded to Butler, who made
him believe in the reality of Southern outrages. Grant
was ultimately responsible for the armed support of the
republican regime in the Southern states. He had no
keen comprehension of the problems of good government,
and in his Southern policy, as in other civil matters, he had a soldier's
desire to be obeyed. His support of the party's program in the South
alienated the feeling of many republicans. It was largely responsible
for the liberal republican movement of 1872 and for the decisive
democratic victory in 1874.
He was not a year in office before he was in a needless quarrel
with Sumner. He undertook without the knowledge of the cabinet
to secure the annexation of Santo Domingo (page 671).
The senate would not accept a treaty to that effect, and His
Sumner, chairman of its foreign committee, was out-
spoken in opposition. In the senate he was safe from Sumner.
retaliation, but Grant struck at him elsewhere. Motley,
minister to England and close personal friend of Sumner, had violated
instructions from the state department. The case would ordinarily
end with a reprimand, but the day after the Dominican treaty was
rejected, Grant recalled Motley peremptorily. Sumner recognized
the thrust at himself, and became very angry. Each contestant was
outspoken and unyielding, and the newspapers were soon full of the
bitter things they said. Sumner carried the attack into the senate
when the administration senators replied in behalf of the president.
Fish was drawn into the affair, and soon was not on speaking terms
with the indignant senator from Massachusetts. The pertinacity
of the latter clearly put him in the wrong, but men could not forget
that the beginning of the quarrel was unnecessary.
The loss in the following year of two of the three first-rate men in the
cabinet shows how much Grant was yielding to the spoilsmen. Attor-
ney-General Hoar had much opposition from them, and
offered to resign, but the offer was refused. He was Dismissed
surprised, therefore, to receive on June 15, 1870, without
warning, the curtest possible request for his resignation. It then
transpired that Grant, seeking votes for the Dominican treaty, had
appealed to the Southern republican senators. They liked Sumner,
who opposed the treaty, and would not vote for it unless
they were given representation in the cabinet ; and Hoar fe
was removed in order to make a vacancy. Cox's elimina-
tion was not quite so summary. He offended the Butler machine
by opposing the schemes of a powerful clique who wished to acquire
646 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
mining lands in California and by introducing civil service reform
into the department of the interior. Senators Cameron, of Pennsyl-
vania, and Chandler, of Michigan, friends of jobbery in many forms,
were particularly anxious for his removal. Cox also gave offense
by attempting to reform the Indian service, which was in a wretched
state through the corruption of the Indian agents. As the clamor
against him became insistent, he thought to test his position by an
offer to withdraw, October 3, 1870. Grant's acceptance was so prompt
as to leave no doubt that he supported the spoilsmen. Fish alone
in the cabinet was now in sympathy with the liberals, and his immu-
nity was due to his great success in settling the Alabama claims.
It was not long after these events that Grant aroused the opposition
of the civil service reformers. He favored their plans at first and
sought to execute fairly the bill of 1871 empowering him
Opposition to make rules for the selection of civil servants, and he
Service made George William Curtis chairman of the commission
Reformers, which acted as an advisory body. Soon the reformers
were in conflict with the machine politicians, and Grant,
who was not an idealist, grew tired of the controversy which followed.
Reformers criticized him for not aiding them, and Curtis resigned
his chairmanship in disgust. They thought the president entirely
with the spoilsmen, and most of them supported the liberal republican
movement of 1872 and 1874. Their attitude confirmed his dislike
for their leaders, and he said in 1879, " There is a good deal of cant
about civil service reform."
More conspicuous was his connection with the " Black Friday" specu-
lations of Jay Gould and James Fiske, Jr. These two men
Gould Fisk owne(^ controlling interests in the Erie railroad, which they
Speculation. ran m tne interest of their operations in its stock. The
first was a shrewd manipulator and the second a gaudy
adventurer. In 1869 Gould worked out the following scheme: He
thought if gold, then at 132, could be put up to 145, Europe, buying
grain for gold, would take much American wheat. This increased
demand would mean a rise in wheat in the West, where the farmers
would sell rapidly. Wheat would move to the coast, and the Erie,
a grain-carrying road, would have larger freight receipts. The scheme
seemed only to demand putting up the price of gold. There was but
$20,000,000 of the metal accessible in New York, and the schemers
felt able to corner it and raise the price, since many men must have it
continually to settle their business contracts. The one obstacle
was the possibility that the secretary of the treasury, Boutwell, would
sell gold for bonds when the price rose. He was doing this all the time
and was accustomed to give a month's warning of the amount he
would thus place in the market. Gould was audacious enough to
undertake to induce the president to restrain the secretary from
purchasing bonds for a time.
GRANT AND JAY GOULD
647
Grant had a brother-in-law, Corbin, in New York, who speculated
in stocks, and through him Gould dined with Grant and got himself
and Fisk seen at a theater in company with the president
in order to impress the financial public. He also seized the
opportunity to urge on Grant his view of the relation of gold to
the price of grain. The latter received it with interest, for he had close
at heart the welfare of the farmers. He at length was convinced, and
advised Boutwell to stop selling gold. This was early in September,
and Gould began at once to buy gold. In two days the price was
137. He bought large quantities for Corbin, and for others connected
with the president, lending them the money to carry the transaction.
When gold was at 137, Grant went for .several days to a place
in western Pennsylvania inaccessible to railroads or telegraph.
The moment seemed propitious, and Gould redoubled
his efforts. Fisk, who was a bold buyer, now became
active in the scheme and gold rose to 140. There was
much suffering among those who needed gold ; some of them by frantic
efforts reached Grant and urged him to sell gold. Gould learned of
it and realized that short reflection would induce Grant to comply.
He determined, therefore, to sell his supply, bought in the campaign
of the preceding days at a high figure. He ordered his agents to sell
gold as they could, but not to sell to the brokers of Fisk, who now
appeared as buying on his own account. While he thus sold, Fisk
continued to put up the price, giving Gould's brokers opportunity
to sell to persons who, in great fright, began to buy before the price
became exhorbitant. Gould began to sell on Thursday, September
23. At the close of the day the price was 144 and he still had much
on hand. Friday morning Fisk began to bid it up madly. From
145 it rose to 150, then upward until at noon it was at 162. The
exchange was in an uproar and Fisk was walking the floor, swearing
he would carry the price to 200. Men began to fear he had the power
to do so, and buying began again at 162. It had not gone far when
news came that the government was selling gold. Instantly the
price fell and the market closed at 135. Before the collapse came,
Gould had sold all his holding at a good price, most of it to reliable
men. Fisk, meantime, had bought heavily, but without paying cash.
He went into bankruptcy and forfeited his contracts. But he con-
tinued Gould's partner and seemed still to prosper, which caused
much wagging of heads. A few people thought Grant a beneficiary
of the plot, but the charge was not believed by those who knew all
the facts. His only error in the affair was his credulous goodness
which made him an easy mark for Gould.
648 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN or 1872
All these failings of Grant resulted in serious political opposition.
Its first appearance was in Missouri, when Carl Schurz, senator from
that state, headed a group of republicans who desired a
^fje more liberal Southern policy. They nominated B. Gratz
publicans e~ Brown f°r governor and elected him with the aid of demo-
crats. The movement grew stronger as the administra-
tion at Washington showed no improvement, and its leaders thought
that a similar combination in 1872 might win the presidency. In
a state meeting they called a national convention of liberal republicans,
May i, 1872. The call elicited a hearty response and had the approval
of many prominent men and newspapers. The convention met as
called. Its platform arraigned the administration on every disputed
point, and on this all were agreed. But there was great difficulty
over the tariff. The movement generally had favored a lowering of
duties; but Greeley, of the New York Tribune, who was friendly
in most things, declared his paper would oppose tariff reduction.
It was thought to be worth a compromise to wrench so influential a
journal from the old party, and so the platform, when adopted, declared
that the tariff question could safely be left to the wisdom of congress.
Among the candidates before the convention were B. Gratz Brown,
Charles Francis Adams, and Greeley himself. The strength of Greeley
was large in New York, one of whose senators, Fenton, was
Nominated °PP°sed to Conkling, the other senator, on account of
a squabble over the patronage. Fenton hoped to have
a president with whom he had influence. Greeley, however, made
poor headway, until Brown, angry at some alleged unfairness of the
Adams men, withdrew in favor of the New Yorker and started a
stampede in that direction. Schurz and other cool-headed men tried
in vain to stem the tide, and Greeley was nominated on the sixth
ballot. It was an unfortunate choice. Greeley had genius, honesty,
and a large following; but he was eccentric, vain, and impractical.
The candidate for vice-president was B. Gratz Brown. The regular
republicans on June 5 unanimously renominated Grant
nominated with Henry Wilson, of Massachusetts, for vice-president.
The platform supported reconstruction and the protec-
tive tariff. July 9 the democrats in their convention accepted Greeley
for their candidate. He had been their bitterest foe
Democrats m days Past> and to indorse him seemed to discard both
dignity and principle.
The campaign was relentlessly personal. Grant's military services
endeared him to the people. They knew his good qualities and
thought little of his errors. His managers turned their attention to
making Greeley look ridiculous. A protectionist leading the tariff
LOW POLITICAL IDEALS 649
reformers, an opponent of civil service reform leading the civil service
reformers, a man renowned for his sharp attacks on the democracy
leading the democrats, the spectacle was unusual. His personal
appearance aided this kind of warfare. Thomas Nast, brilliant and
partisan, caricatured him relentlessly, and the people applauded.
Greeley's vanity was only a childish weakness, and it might have been
overlooked by his persecutors. He conducted his own campaign
fairly, but the jibes at him cut him to the heart. To be depicted as
a scarecrow, a despot, and an imbecile by turns was more than he
could stand. He closed the campaign in sorrow. October 30, Mrs.
Greeley died ; November 5, he lost the election ; and November 29,
he himself was dead. This quick accumulation of misfortune softened
most hearts, but the election results were still overwhelming. Grant
had 272 electoral votes and Greeley 66. Only six states, Georgia,
Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Tennessee, and Texas voted for the
unhappy editor. Louisiana and Arkansas were in dispute, and all
the others were for Grant. In the house the republican majority
was raised from 35 to 105. Grant and the group whose errors were
responsible for the liberal republican protest had a right to think they
were endorsed by the people.
POLITICAL DECAY UNDER GRANT
In the scandals disclosed in Grant's second term he had no conscious
profit. His own fault was that he knew not what transpired around him
and trusted men whom a better judge of public men would
have suspected. The misdoings themselves were rooted
in the past. They were due to loose habits which crept
into political affairs in war times and throve in the turbulent days
of reconstruction. Everywhere office-holding had its opportunity
for profit, and a powerful lobby worked on the cupidity1 of the public
servants. The glaring frauds in the Southern states were but the
worst eruptions of a disease widely prevalent.
During the campaign of 1872 rumors circulated that prominent
republican congressmen were concerned in a railroad scandal. Denials
came, and the incident was dismissed as campaign lie.
After the election the rumors were revived, and Elaine,
one of the accused, asked for an investigation. Two Frauds,
committees of investigation were, in fact, created, one by
the house, known as the "Poland Committee," from its chairman,
and one by the senate, known as the "Wilson Committee." From
the facts they discovered we may gather the following story :
The Union Pacific railroad, completed in 1869, had received little
cash from subscribing stockholders and paid for its construction
in four kinds of securities. The first was its own bonds to the amount
of $27,000,000, secured by a first mortgage on the road. The second
650 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
was the United States bonds to a similar amount lent by congress
with a second mortgage for the government's security. The third was
land bonds issued by the road and secured by the large
Origin tracts of land congress had donated to the Union Pacific.
The fourth was certificates of stock in the enterprise.
To build the road a construction company known as the Credit
Mobilier was formed out of the chief stockholders. It paid out for
construction less than $50,000,000 and received securities worth in
the market $70,000,000, a profit, according to the report of the com-
mittee, of $23,000,000. In 1868 it began to divide its earnings among
its shareholders. Within that year each owner of a hundred-dollar
share in the Credit Mobilier received $60 in cash, first mortgage
bonds worth $230 face value, and railroad stock worth $515 face
value. Later distributions added largely to these excessive profits.
It meant that a group of men controlling the Union Pacific had found
a way of transferring to themselves in the capacity of a construction
company a large part of the road's securities and among them large
issues of stock. The latter feature violated the charter, which required
all the stock to be issued for cash. In 1867 an intimation of what
was going on got abroad and a resolution was introduced in the house
of representatives to investigate the affairs of the Union Pacific.
Oakes Ames, a wealthy Massachusetts representative, was promi-
nently concerned in the Credit Mobilier and undertook to block the
investigation. He got the construction company to place 243 of
its shares at his disposal and sold them at par to leading congressmen,
although they were worth double that amount in the market ; and if
the purchaser could not pay for the stock, Ames lent him the money.
His scheme succeeded so well that he wrote his associates that they
need not fear the proposed investigation. Most of his victims,
however, repented their action and surrendered their stock when they
saw what the deal meant. The charges could not be disproved, and the
house, at the recommendation of the committee, censured Ames and
Brooks, of New York. Schuyler Colfax, vice-president until March 4,
1873, was shown to be concerned in the affair. He could not well
be impeached, as he was about to go out of office, but the disclosure
wrecked his career. The senate committee recommended the expul-
sion of Patterson, of New Hampshire; but his term was about to
expire, and the senators allowed him to go in peace. Among the
acquitted ones were some of the most prominent men in congress.
The situation revealed by the investigation made a deep impression
on the nation.
The people were so excited that they were ready to see fraud in
many things they had not formerly objected to. In such a light
was viewed the "Salary Grab" act of March 3, 1873. As congress
closed its labors, it increased the salaries of the president, vice-
president, supreme court justices, speaker, senators, and representa-
A DEMOCRATIC HOUSE 651
tives. Members of congress had been getting $5000 a year and
were to have $7500; and the law, following bad precedent, was to
apply to the congress just ending. This retroactive fea-
ture produced a vehement popular protest. It was dubbed £ *£
the "back pay steal"; and many members did not dare Grab."
take the additional pay. The succeeding congress re-
pealed the obnoxious law so far as it related to senators and repre-
sentatives ; but spite of the repeal, the act was responsible for many
election disasters in the congressional contest of 1874.
In May, 1874, the ways and means committee of the house
uncovered the Sanborn contracts. By a rather doubtful construction
of law, John D. Sanborn, one of Butler's tools, was given
a contract to collect some overdue internal revenue P16
claims at a commission of 50 per cent. He recovered $42 7,000 contracts,
and got the stipulated reward of $213,500. He swore
he paid $156,000 of this to his assistants, which meant, probably,
that this amount served to hold together the Butler machine in Massa-
chusetts. The contracts could not be repudiated, and Sanborn was
not touched ; but congress by a law made a repetition of the offense
impossible. Richardson, secretary of the treasury, who had allowed
the contracts, only escaped a vote of censure by resigning. •
The campaign of 1874 came close on the heels of the Sanborn dis-
closure. No one thought the republicans would escape a rebuke,
but few foresaw how overwhelming it would be. In the
house then in existence were 195 republicans, 88 demo-
crats, and 4 liberals. In the new house were 108 republi-
cans, 1 68 democrats, and 14 liberals and independents. For the
first time since 1860 the democratic party had the confidence of the
country. In this year, also, Samuel J. Tilden, a lawyer of ability
and a steady foe of political corruption, was elected democratic gov-
ernor of New York. Among his supporters were many republicans
who took this means of showing their disapproval of the conditions
in their own party.
Their defeat sobered the republicans, but fraud was deep-rooted
and two more scandals were yet to come to light. In 1874 Bristow
succeeded the spoilsman, Richardson, as secretary of
the treasury. He was a reformer and began to investigate
the department. In 1875 he uncovered a bad situation
in St. Louis. A group of distillers in that city, with the
aid of McDonald, supervisor of internal revenue, had been able to
defraud the government annually of a million dollars in whisky
taxes. Bristow prosecuted the conspirators, and McDonald was sent
to the penitentiary. He later published a book in which he said
Grant shared the ring's profits. Only the president's reputation for
integrity saved him now in the minds of the people. It was notorious
that he had accepted expensive gifts and entertainment from Me-
652 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
Donald, and it was proved that Babcock, his private secretary, was
very intimate with the St. Louis criminals. When Babcock was put
on trial, Grant voluntarily testified for him, and although the
private secretary was acquitted, few people doubted his guilt.
Grant retained him private secretary until the criticisms were so
loud that he could keep him no longer. Dogged faithfulness to a
friend was one of the president's good qualities; but in this case
it led him astray.
This series of scandals ended with an investigation in 1876 which
showed that secretary of war Belknap had connived at a bargain
for the appointment of an Indian agent at Fort Sill. The
incumbent, as it was proved, fearing removal, had agreed
Scandal. to Pav n*s T^va^ $12,000 a year to withdraw. One-half
this sum was sent annually to Mrs. Belknap, and after
her death it was paid to her husband, the secretary of war. The
evidence was plain and abundant, and a resolution to impeach Belknap
passed the house unanimously. A few hours before it was voted on,
the secretary tendered his resignation, which Grant immediately
accepted. It cannot be doubted that he wished to save the erring
official from punishment.
THE ELECTION OF 1876
As another presidential election approached, the regular republicans
thought of candidates. Those closest to Grant began to talk of a third
term, counting on his immense popularity. He himself
Candidates was sounded and said he would not be a candidate again
unless it should seem to be his "imperative duty," which
was generally interpreted as assent to the plan. The scheme received
its death blow, however, when the house, in December, 1875, by a
vote of 234 to 1 8, resolved that a departure from the custom long
followed "would be unwise, unpatriotic, and fraught with perils
to our free institutions " ; 70 of the 88 republicans and all the democrats
in the house voted for this resolution. Grant's particular supporters
now divided between Conkling, of New York, and Morton, of Indiana,
the latter securing most of the Southern delegates, from that time
an unwholesome but important element in a republican national
convention. Bristow's work for reform drew to him a following from
the best portion of the party, and Blaine, whose abilities and personal
popularity surpassed those of any other candidate, had a large follow-
ing in the rank and file of the party. He was suspected of improper
relations in regard to a railroad in Arkansas and his method of dis-
posing of the "Mulligan letters" did not entirely remove the suspicion.
As he was the strongest candidate, there was a disposition for the others
to combine against him. Conkling, his personal enemy, was happy
to promote such a move. There were several "favorite sons," among
THE PARTY NOMINEES 653
them Governor R. B. Hayes, for whom the 44 votes of Ohio were
instructed.
The convention met in Cincinnati, June 14. On the first ballot
Blaine had 285 votes, Morton 125, Bristow 113, Conkling 99, Hayes 61,
and other candidates 72. On each ballot until the fifth
Blaine held his own and Hayes gained slowly, while Morton
and Conkling lost. On the fifth Hayes held his own and convention,
the Blaine vote went to 308, only 70 less than was necessary
for a choice. The danger of a stampede to him seems now to have
impressed his opponents, and they quickly concentrated on Hayes,
who on the sixth ballot had 384, and was nominated. It was well
timed; for on this ballot Blaine had 351 votes and his friends were
enthusiastic. William A. Wheeler, of New York, was nominated
for vice-president. Blaine was defeated through the union for that
purpose of the worst and best factions of the party, the extreme
spoilsmen and the extreme reformers. Hayes pleased the latter
because he was a man of excellent character, friendly to civil service
reform and opposed to severe measures in the South ; the spoilsmen
accepted him to beat Blaine, whom they feared, and because they
thought Hayes could be managed.
The democrats turned to Samuel J. Tilden, who seemed a strong
candidate when reform was the issue. He first became prominent
through the energy with which he prosecuted the Tweed
ring in 1871. In doing so he won the antagonism of
Tammany ; but that organization was so much discredited
by Tweed that it could not do great harm in the campaign. Democrats.
In the states north of the Ohio the democrats had some
strength. Here Allen, of Ohio, trained in the late Jacksonian school,
and Hendricks, of Indiana, both prominent in the revival of 1874,
were mentioned. General Hancock, of Pennsylvania, was also urged
as a man popular with the soldiers. On the first ballot Tilden had
417 votes, only 79 less than two-thirds of the convention. Of his
opponents Hendricks had 140, Hancock 75, and Allen 56. Tilden
was evidently the man most likely to win, and on the second ballot
he got 535 votes and was declared nominated. The democrats in
general did not care for reforms. They were a party of opposition,
trained through a long series of hardships to a policy of expediency.
They did not relish the New York leadership, but submitted to secure
party success. Thomas A. Hendricks was nominated for vice-
president.
The two platforms contained many generalities, but the important
issue was the record of the republicans. It was a damaging affair,
and Blaine sought by a skillful ruse to shift it to the South- Tfae Issues
ern issue. The house was debating a bill to grant amnesty
to the remaining confederates under disabilities when he moved
to exempt from its action the president of the confederacy. He
654 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
made in support of the motion a fiery speech charging Davis with
responsibility for the suffering of union soldiers at Andersonville.
It was a shrewd play; for it brought, as Elaine expected, a heated
reply from the Southern members. Thus opened a sectional debate
in which was obliterated much of the recently developed good will
for the South. Thus the sectional controversy was made an issue
in the campaign at a time when it had seemed to be receding. Elaine's
maneuver displeased the liberals in his party and made them work
hard to defeat his nomination, but it was reflected in the platform
which indorsed the Southern policy of Grant. Another plank pledged
the party to pay the national debt without discounting it. The
democrats took a similar position on finance, but they arraigned the
administration most severely for frauds and scandals, and pressed
the argument home on a thousand stumps. Hayes, who was little
known when nominated, came out well in his letter of acceptance.
Reformers felt reassured when he said that he was against the spoils
system and in favor of such a policy as would wipe out the distinction
between North and South. His attitude and the hard work of his
supporters kept the Northwest firm, but the democrats were strongly
entrenched in New York, and held it spite of the lukewarm attitude
The Results °^ Tammany. In the South the democrats carried the
states in which the republican regime had been over-
thrown, but there were hard battles in the three states still in repub-
lican hands, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida. Each of these
was fighting for redemption from republican rule, using methods
by this time well known in the South. In each there were dis-
puted returns, and the result of the national contest was dependent
on the way they were received.
By midnight of election day most of the crowds who listened to
the returns throughout the country went home assured that Tilden
was elected. All the New York papers but the Herald
Returns anc^ ^e Times said as much next morning, for he had
New York, Indiana, and other doubtful states, and he
was believed to have the "Solid South." The Herald and Times
announced that the result was in doubt. It appeared later that
Tilden had 184 undisputed votes and Hayes 165. South Carolina's,
Louisiana's, and Florida's votes and one elector from Oregon were
disputed. If Tilden got one of the twenty, he would be elected : if
Hayes got all, he would be elected. Claiming these contested votes
for Hayes, it is said, was the suggestion of a shrewd manager in the
early morning of the day after election. It was seized eagerly by his
associates, who urged the managers in the states concerned to relax
no efforts in support of their contention. Great excitement prevailed.
The democrats thought the republicans were trying to steal the
presidency. The republicans replied that they only sought to have
a fair count.
THE CONTESTED RETURNS
65S
It is difficult to decide between the two sides. In South Carolina
was much intimidation by the whites and much fraud by both parties.
There was an election board which passed on disputed
returns, and by rejecting votes which the democrats The
thought should be counted it gave certificates of election ge^m°g
to republican presidential electors and to most of the south8
republican candidates for state and county offices. In Carolina;
due time these electors met and voted for Hayes. The
democrats ignored these proceedings and insisted that the board
had acted unfairly. These electors, as well as Wade Hampton,
their candidate for governor, had a majority of the votes certified
by the election officers, and they claimed that these returns were
not subject to revision. Their electors accordingly met, cast their
vote for Tilden, and took steps to report the vote to the United States
senate. The same situation existed in Florida, where
there had been much confusion in voting. The returning
board undertook to correct the returns from the counties and the
result was a republican majority. The electors thus returned cast
the vote of the state for Hayes, and the democratic electors met and
voted for Tilden.
The proceedings in these two states suggested partisanship; in
Louisiana they went somewhat further. Here, also, was a returning
board with power to canvass the returns. Legally it
should have had five members, one a democrat, but the
democratic member had resigned, and the others, all republicans, two
white and two black, refused to choose a successor. The personnel of
the board was bad. The president, in the words of General Sheridan,
was "a political trickster and a dishonest man." These four men, all
republicans, had in their hands the making of a president, and the eyes
of the nation were on them. Twenty-five of the leading men of each
party came to New Orleans to watch the count, and the board asked
five from each group of "visiting statesmen" to be present at the
hearing of evidence bearing on the disputed elections. The evidence
taken, the four members of the board deliberated in secret. Decision
after decision was for the republicans, and at the end of the delibera-
tions what had been on the face of the returns a democratic majority
of 6300 was a republican majority of 4600.
By the work of these returning boards Hayes got formal recognition
for nineteen of the twenty votes necessary to elect him. The other
vote was from Oregon. The state was republican by a majority of
1000 ; but one elector, a deputy postmaster, was ineligible because by
the constitution a federal officer may not be chosen an elector. The
governor, a democrat, gave the certificate to the democratic candidate
with the largest vote, and it resulted that two returns came from
Oregon.
The constitution provides that the president of the United States
656 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
senate shall open the votes from the states and count them in the
presence of the two houses, and it says nothing about
Passm& on disputed returns. No precedent, since the
Conted ? government began, had settled the point. The only case in
point was in 1821, when there was doubt in regard to the
vote of Missouri (page 374). But here the president of the senate
only avoided the issue by announcing that if the vote of Missouri
were counted, Monroe would have 231 votes, if not counted, 229, and
in either case he was elected. In 1865, 1869, 'and 1873, the votes of
the states not in the union were not counted, but this was on the
ground that they were unreconstructed. In 1877 all the states were
in the union. The experience of reconstruction days, however, seemed
to establish the principle that congress, or the senate, had authority
to pass on disputed returns.
The "twenty-second joint rule," passed in 1865, might have had a
bearing on the question. It provided that one house could prevent
the counting of a disputed electoral vote or votes. Early
£he in 1876 the republican senate withdrew its consent to the
Second y rule, and it was held that a joint rule was repealed when one
Joint Rule." house withdrew its consent. Had this joint rule been in
force in 1877 the democrats could have refused to recognize
the Louisiana vote : that would have meant no election, and the de-
cision, thrown into the democratic house, would have been for Tilden.
The republicans congratulated themselves on the repeal of the rule,
and the democrats had no way of rehabilitating it.
When congress met, the situation was threatening. Republicans
and democrats took sides with such earnestness that people feared
that a civil war might occur if some way was not found to
Electoral settle the dispute. Each house appointed a committee to
Commission, devise a plan. The democrats seemed to wish to have the
election referred to the house, and the republicans seemed
to be without a definite plan. But each side watched intently every
move of the other. There was much discussion, and at last an electoral
commission was suggested. Each house was to appoint five men from
its own membership to whom would be added five justices of the
supreme court approved by each side, in all, fifteen members of a
commission which should pass on the disputed returns. Of the house
representation on the commission three were democrats and two re-
publicans, of the senate representation three were republicans and two
democrats, and two of the justices, Clifford and Field, had democratic,
and two others, Miller and Strong, had republican, leanings. So far,
therefore, the commission had seven democrats and seven republicans,
and everything would depend on the fifth justice. For this position
it was thought, when the plan was devised, that Judge Davis would be
named. He did not vote in the election of 1876, and he was called
an independent. On the day the plan was submitted to congress
EIGHT TO SEVEN
657
The
Decision.
Davis by democratic votes was elected United States senator from
Illinois, and was out of the question for the commission. At this late
hour the democrats could hardly withdraw approval from their agree-
ment, and another justice must be taken. The choice fell on Justice
Bradley, of known republican leaning. Thus a commission was selected
which, if it were influenced by partisan sympathy, would have eight
republicans and seven democrats. It began its hearings on February i.
The first returns taken up were from Florida. Evidence was taken,
then came secret deliberations, then more evidence, and more delibera-
tion, while the public awaited the result in the greatest
suspense and anxiety. It was believed that the decision
in regard to Florida would indicate the tone of those in the
other cases. At last the verdict was given, Bradley casting the de-
ciding vote. It announced that congress could not go behind the de-
cision of a state, that the certificate must be accepted if the proper
Florida authorities signed it. On this principle the commission gave
Florida to Hayes. The same proceedings were taken in the Louisiana
case, the commission refusing to hear evidence to show that the cer-
tificate approved by the republican governor was not founded in fact.
By the same vote, eight to seven, Hayes got this state. In the Oregon
and South Carolina cases the commission unanimously rejected the
Tilden electors, thus giving the republicans all the disputed votes.
The commission held, therefore, that if wrong had been done it was by
the state authorities, and that the constitution and laws did not give
congress power to correct it. The decision supported the theory of
state rights, but the democrats thought it strange that their opponents,
after invading at will, in their reconstruction policy, the function of
states, should have appeared so solicitous to preserve the authority
of the states in the matter then under consideration.
The decision caused disappointment to the supporters of Tilden,
but the country at large was relieved that there would be no civil war.
The South found special comfort in the prospect of re-
gaining complete control of its own affairs. Before the
verdict was given, friends of Hayes, probably without his
direct assurance, made it certain that if elected he would from the
withdraw the federal troops, without which the last vestige South,
of carpet-bag government would fail. In view of the rec-
ognition of the state by the commission, he could hardly do otherwise.
The result in South Carolina and Louisiana was soon evident. In the
spring, not long after the inauguration, Hayes had a confer-
ence in Washington with Chamberlain and Hampton, the Carolina
republican and democratic claimants for the governorship
of the former of the two states, and made it plain what his policy would
be ; and not long afterwards he recalled the federal troops in the South-
ern states. Chamberlain had no support from the mass of whites,
they would not pay taxes to republican officers, and the police would
2U
The With-
drawal of
Troops
658 PARTY HISTORY, 1865-1877
not support his assertion of power. Hampton was their governor,
the democratic legislature took possession of the statehouse, and
Chamberlain withdrew from the field. The people hailed his departure
as a token of the redemption of South Carolina from alien rule. The
same thing occurred in Louisiana, where Packard, the republican, gave
way to Nicholls, the democrat, and a democratic legislature was rec-
ognized by the people. In Florida an order of the state supreme court
gave the democrats the governorship, and the republican claimant,
without the support of federal troops, was forced to yield.
The losers by this process uttered imprecations on a president who,
as they said, profited by their work to get into office, and deserted those
who had the same right to power that he had to the elec-
Jhe. . toral votes which made him president. But their charge
Position Of i J! r • Tr ^
Hayes. was naro-ly fair. If the national government, acting
through the executive, could pass on a state election in
reference to the governorship, it could pass on it in reference to the
choice of presidential electors ; and if it could not pass on it in refer-
ence to electors — which was the verdict of the electoral commission —
it could not pass on it in reference to the choice of governor. The key
to the situation was our dual form of government, which now worked
one way for the national side of the controversy and another way for
the state's side. The republicans profited by its operation on one side
and the democrats by its operation on the other, and the democrats
lost in Washington while they gained in the South.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Most of the general works and original sources for this chapter are the same as for
chapters XXVIII and XXIX. In addition one should consult the periodicals of the
time, among which the most important are : The Nation, edited by E. L. Godkin
and generally adverse to the republican party ; Harper's Weekly, edited by G. W.
Curtis, generally independent; The Independent, edited by Tilton; The Christian
Union, edited by H. W. Beecher, — the last two presenting political news and
comment from the standpoint of the religious press. The most important news-
papers are: The Tribune (N. Y.), The Times (N. Y.), The Sun (N. Y.), and The
Republican (Springfield, Mass.), — all ably edited and influential.
Monographs on political subjects, besides those hitherto mentioned, are : Ha-
worth, The Hayes-Tilden Disputed Election (1906) ; Ewing, The Hayes-Tilden
Contest before the Electoral Commission (1910) ; Gibson, A Political Crime (1885),
strongly in favor of Tilden; McDonald, Secrets of the Great Whisky Ring (1880);
Stan wood, History of the Presidency (1898) ; and Bancroft and Dunning, Carl
Schurz's Political Career, in Schurz, Reminiscences, vol. Ill (1909).
Biographies that bear particularly on party affairs are : Foulke, Oliver P. Morton,
2 vols. (1899) ; Riddle, Benjamin F. Wade (1888) ; Conkling, Life of Roscoe Conk-
ling (1889) ; Hollister, Schuyler Coif ax (1887) ; the Detroit Post and Tribune, Life
of Zachariah Chandler (1880); Pearson, John A. Andrew, 2 vols. (1902); Salter,
/. W. Grimes (1876) ; Adams, Charles Francis Adams (1900) ; Boutwell, Reminis-
cences, 2 vols. (1902) ; Bigelow, Samuel J. Tilden, 2 vols. (1895) ; Merriam, Life of
Samuel Bowles, 2 vols. (1885) ; Gary, George William Curtis (1900) ; Linn, Horace
Greeley (1903) ; Paine, Thomas Nast (1904) ; Oberholtzer, Jay Cooke, 2 vols. (1907) ;
Hoar, Autobiography, 2 vols. (1903) ; Barnes, Memoir of Thurlow Weed (1884) ;
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
659
Stanwood, James G. Elaine (1908) ; Storey and Emerson, E. Rock-wood Hoar (1911) ;
Bigelow, edr., Writings and Speeches of Samuel J. Tilden, 2 vols. (1885); and
Ibid., Letters of Tilden, 2 vols. (1908).
For Independent Reading
Adams, Charles Francis Adams (1900) ; Garland, Ulysses S. Grant (1898) ; Hoar,
Autobiography, 2 vols. (1903) ; Young, Around the World with Grant, 2 vols. (1879) J
and Gary, G. W. Curtis (1900).
CHAPTER XXXI
ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
FINANCIAL REORGANIZATION
THE end of the civil war saw confusion in national finances. The
debt was nearly $3,000,000,000, the interest on it was 6 per cent, taxes
were high, and the currency was inflated by large issues of
Ntat'6 °aithe ^a^ ten(^er n°tes. The situation was abnormal, and was
Finances. endured in war times because it was thought that ante-
bellum conditions would be restored with the advent of
peace. The experience of a few months showed how difficult this
was. No one objected to paying the debt or to refunding it at lower
interest, but since a large part of the taxes were high import duties,
the protected interests were against their reduction, and since many
people had adjusted their business to the high prices which resulted
from inflation, a large class, particularly the debtors, resisted the policy
of contraction, although it was evident that the difference in value
between gold and the legal tender notes was an embarrassment to the
large commercial and financial dealers. Thus the tariff and the cur-
rency became important political problems for the post-bellum states-
men.
At the head of the treasury department was Hugh McCulloch, a
man of great ability. He was originally a successful banker in Indiana,
who became comptroller of the currency in 1863, and was
ma(ie secretary in 1865. He had a banker's instinct for
the safe and careful management of obligations, and was
specially interested in refunding the debt and restoring specie payment,
which meant wiping out the difference between gold and legal tender.
He had an able assistant in David A. Wells, special commissioner of the
revenue. Wells was a trained economist, and devoted himself es-
pecially to adjusting the tariff to new conditions. He wished to make
it yield a revenue adequate to the needs of government, but with the
schedules so arranged that the consumer should pay the smallest tax
consistent with the demands of the situation, and that the manufac-
turers of various protected articles should share fairly in the mild
but progressive reductions of duties which he thought necessary.
The two men worked together in the general plan of reform ; but it
was soon seen that they would have powerful opposition from the
beneficiaries of the existing system. The debtor class, strong in the
660
WAR TAXES CONTINUED 66 1
West, where there was much borrowing to develop un worked re-
sources, opposed a contraction of the stock of legal tender ; and the
protected manufacturers fought by every means in their power against
lowering the high war duties under which they had great advantages
in their business.
McCulloch's first concern was the debt. The government owed
$500,000,000 in unfunded obligations. He discharged it in 7-30 notes,
which the creditors of the government took without hesi-
tation. Then he took up the task of refunding the entire
debt. In three years he got the holders of much of it, including the
7-30 notes of 1865, to exchange their holdings for new 5-20 bonds
with interest at 6 per cent. The revenues continued to be large, and
he used them to reduce the debt as rapidly as possible. By 1868 he
had paid $519,000,000 of it, although the issue of $49,000,000 of bonds
to pay for Alaska and to aid the Pacific railroads made the net decrease
smaller than that amount. During the war, confidence in the nation's
financial ability was severely strained, and some men prophesied the
debt would never be paid. This sharp reduction in three years bene-
fited the public credit and made easier later funding operations.
McCulloch's excellent financial showing was made in the face of an
annual reduction of the high war taxes equal to $140,000,000 in three
years. He felt that the people had a right to relief, but he
encountered such strong opposition that he dared not try Non-Pro-
to lower the tariff. He made his reforms in the other !^Jse
taxes, that is, in the internal revenue and the tax on in- Lowered,
comes over $1000. The protectionists were confident of
their power and disposed to be aggressive. In 1866 they carried
through the house a bill for still higher rates, but the senate did not
pass it. At that time protection was not a party issue,
and the republican senate looked on the demands of the
manufacturers as unwise and selfish. It met them by
passing a bill on principles suggested by Wells, in which he
sought to replace in a logical way the haphazard war-time rates with-
out lowering them in general. The protectionists were suspicious of
reforms coming from Wells and defeated the bill in the
house. In 1867 a strong combination of wool growers and
manufacturers secured the passage in both houses of a wool
and woollens act, with higher duties on those commodities.
They claimed it was needed to save their industry from declin-
ing prices; but spite of the act prices still fell. Thus the only
tariff legislation in Johnson's administration was this act raising
rates.
Defeated here, McCulloch had better success with his currency re-
forms, although in that quarter he could not do all he wished.
In 1865 the legal tender outstanding amounted to $433,000,000, and
$145 of it exchanged for $100 in gold. He desired to secure parity
662 ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
of the two by the resumption of specie payment ; but he dared not
attempt it until the amount of legal tender was greatly lessened.
This currency, issued during the war, was at first considered tem-
porary. It was thought the notes of the national banks
Retiring would be the permanent paper currency and that they
Tender would expand as the needs of business demanded. Mc-
Notes. Culloch well knew that the people were generally unwill-
ing to lessen the volume of money, but the commercial and
financial interests were anxious for resumption, the country was pros-
perous, and in 1866 he got congress to authorize the retirement of
$10,000,000 of the legal tenders, or "greenbacks," within six months,
and after that $4,000,000 a month. A year later came the panic of 1867,
prices of farm products fell, money became hard to borrow, and the im-
pression gained ground that contracting the amount of legal tenders was
partly responsible for the situation. There was undoubtedly much
suffering, but McCulloch and the best financiers wished to go on with
contraction at the moderate rate ordered by congress. The opposition
was strong in the West, where the panic was severely felt. Observing
that his plans benefited the capitalists of the East, they questioned his
integrity, and sectional bitterness showed itself. Western republicans
and democrats from all quarters supported them, and
Sherman's J°^n Sherman, of Ohio, a good student of finance and a
Position. w^se politician, thought fit to support those opposed to
further contraction. He believed that rather than endure
the inconvenience which always accompanies contraction, it was better
to wait until the expansion of business and population should go so
far that the channels of trade would actively employ all the greenbacks
then existing, with the result that the government could then support
specie payment with a relatively small gold reserve. This would defer
resumption several years, but the West was aroused, and the rapid
growth of the supporters of Pendleton's "Ohio Idea" showed what
measures an aroused people might demand, and Sherman's views were
accepted by his party. February 4, 1868, congress by law ordered
contraction to cease. McCulloch bowed to the inevitable. His
efforts had brought the amount of outstanding legal tender down to
$356,000,000. He retired from office with the inauguration of Grant,
disappointed in his chief purpose, to reestablish specie payment, but
leaving the finances otherwise in good condition.
Boutwell, secretary of the treasury in 1869-1873, desired resump-
tion, but felt that the country would not support it, and worked for
other reforms. He gave most thought to paying the
thCef^ing national debt. The tariff yielded ample revenues, there
tiona/Debt. was a surplus above expenses, and he used it to buy bonds
for retirement. In his period of office the debt was re-
duced by $368,000,000. His success strengthened the nation's credit
and enabled him to reduce the interest, then 6 per cent on the 5~2o's.
FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
663
In 1870 he induced congress to authorize the refunding of $200,000,000
at 5 per cent, $300,000,000 at 4^ per cent, and $1,000,000,000 at 4
per cent, all the bonds to run at the pleasure of the government for
ten, twenty, or thirty years. It was also provided that both principal
and interest of these bonds should be paid in gold. The plan succeeded.
The financiers took all the bonds offered, and the 5~2o's were retired
at the advantage of a large saving in the interest charge.
Boutwell, an Eastern man, was in sympathy with the protectionists.
The majority of his party were of the same opinion, but the Western
republicans in congress, whose constituencies had little
interest in manufacturing, favored a reduction of the exist-
ing high duties. The democrats were also strong in the
West, and they desired lower duties. But there were democratic
districts in the East, particularly in Pennsylvania, New York, and New
Jersey, which contained manufactures, and this made a group of
democratic representatives who supported high duties. The tariff was
still not strictly a party measure, although the tendency to make it so
was becoming strong. The question came up in the first congress
under Grant, since the existing revenue was in excess of the public
necessity. A bill was, therefore, passed in 1870 which gave some relief
to the taxpayers. The protectionists were on the defensive, and suc-
ceeded in throwing the burden of reduction on the non-protected ob-
jects of taxation. There was a slight reduction of duties on imports,
and a considerable increase of the free list, and the rates were lowered
on sugar, tea, and coffee. The internal taxes were lowered until the
amount from that source was only $54,000,000, and further decrease
came by raising the exemption in the income tax from $1000 to $2000,
with the additional provision that this tax be given up entirely at the
end of 1871. The income tax was ever unpopular because of its in-
quisitorial character. The bill of 1870 showed that protection had a
strong hold in congress.
THE LEGAL TENDER DECISIONS
The secretary did not disturb the currency compromise of 1868, but
in 1870 the legal status of the greenbacks became a matter of great in-
terest through the decision of the supreme court in the
case of Hepburn v. Griswold. The constitutionality of
the legal tender law of 1862 had been questioned from the
time of its enactment and was involved in this case. The decision
was written by Chase, secretary of the treasury in 1862, and now chief
justice. It announced that the law impaired the obligation of con-
tracts made before it was passed, and was confiscatory to the extent
of the difference between the value of the dollars in which a debt was
contracted and that of the dollars in which it was paid. Chase frankly
admitted that he was in error in 1862, but said he thought at the former
664 ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
date that the law was necessary to carry on the war. Four other
justices supported his view in 1870, and three dissented. Justice
Miller for the latter held that it is only the state, and not
Decision congress, that is forbidden to impair the obligation of a con-
tract. He held that the letter of the constitution was not
violated by the law, and as the military situation in 1862 was desperate
without the law, the court ought if possible to uphold it, lest the nation
should seem to repudiate an instrument so useful in perpetuating
the existence of the union. Chase and the majority of the court,
however, thought only of the logical interpretation of the constitution.
That instrument, they said, certainly sought to forbid impairment of
contracts, although only the states were mentioned. The court must
think of the spirit of the constitution, and from that point of view
neither congress nor the state should do the forbidden thing. It was
a nice distinction, and seemed to reflect the known political sympathy
of the justices. The country took it as a partisan decision. The
regular republicans pronounced it a repudiation of Lincoln's war policy.
The court came to its decision in November, 1869, but did not hand
it down, or announce it, until February 7, 1870. In the interval
Grier, one of the majority, resigned. As there was a pre-
TheAppoint- vious vacancy in the bench the president now had two
Bradie° and aPP°mtments to make, and he sent the nominations to the
Strong. senate on the very day the decision was announced. He
named Bradley and Strong, both earnest party- men, who
had no sympathy for the position taken by Chase. A cry rose at once
that Grant had "packed" the supreme court. He denied that he
knew what the decision would be ; and as the opinions of the court
were usually guarded most strictly, it is difficult to suppose that any
inkling of this decision had reached him when he made the nominations.
He must, in fact, have taken republicans, and in the state of public
feeling he would hardly have found two men who did not sympathize
with the criticism most of the party hurled at the court.
Whatever was Grant's responsibility, the legal tender act was soon
again before the court, in two cases, Knox v. Lee and Parker v. Davis,
both of which were already on the calendar when the first
CMnion decision was made. The majority of the court, including
Reversed. tne two new members, ordered them taken up and argued.
May i, 1871, the former decision was reversed by a vote of
five to four, Bradley and Strong and the former minority now making
the majority. The decision was announced at once, but the opinions
were not read until January 15, 1872.
INDUSTRIAL PROGRESS
The civil war was followed by a period of business activity. Manu-
factures prospered under the high war duties, there was much rail-
GENERAL PROSPERITY
665
road building in the West, agricultural products still felt the effects
of war prices, and capital found profitable employment in many forms
of new development. In 1867 there was a sharp business
reaction due to the London panic of 1866, but the de-
pression was transitory. In general, the years 1865 to 1873
were replete with hope and development throughout the East, North,
and West. It was only the South, blackened by ruin in its entire life,
that did not feel the rebound of energy which accompanied the advent
of peace.
These eight years of prosperity showed most clearly in four
fields of effort: i. Railroad Construction. It was the period during
which the first transcontinental railroad lines reached the
Pacific coast; but the 1800 miles of such roads were
but a trifle compared with the 30,000 miles of shorter
lines built in every part of the country. This process
prevailed, particularly in the upper Mississippi valley, whose develop-
ment was stimulated by the high price of grain. 2. Agricultural
Expansion. In 1867 the grain-growing area in the United States was
64,418,518 acres : in 1875, although the panic of 1873 had intervened, it
was 86,287,648 acres, and the impetus acquired was so great that,
spite of the prevailing hard times, it was over 100,000,000 acres in
1878. The yield of grain crops rose proportionately from 1,320,236,-
ooo bushels in 1866 to 2,290,008,000 bushels in 1878. This increase
in grain production was more than twice as great as the growth in
population in the same period. 3. The Increase in Capital. This
came from both domestic and foreign sources. The wide establish-
ment of national banks, the issues of war bonds, and the expansion
of the currency through the issue of the legal tenders furnished a vastly
stronger basis of domestic credit, even if we make full allowance for
the element of inflation in most American securities. The sale of
public bonds and railroad securities in Europe, whither a large portion
of these securities went as investments, was a notable feature
of the financial life of the day. The industrial growth of the
country is indicated by the increase in manufacturing capital which
totaled $1,009,000,000 in 1860, $2,118,000,000 in 1870, and $2,790,000,-
ooo in 1880.
4. Growth of Immigration. The growth of industry is seen in the
influx of laborers. In 1861 the immigrants arriving in the country
were 112,702. During the war the incoming tide did not greatly
increase, but after 1865 it grew rapidly. In 1868 the numbers were
326,000, in 1873 they were 460,009, and in 1879, a year of great
prosperity, they were 789,000.
The culmination of this wave of prosperity was in the years 1871 and
1872. The people seemed to think the good times would never end.
Land and bonds sold at high speculative prices, and many enterprises
were immoderately expanded in the hope of still further gain. Con-
666 ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
fidence in the possibilities of American enterprise has ever been great,
but it frequently leads the community too far ; and this happened in
these wonderful years. The result was a collapse in 1873, an<i it began
with the failure of a great banking house, whose name was synony-
mous with business reliability.
Jay Cooke and Co. had earned a good reputation during the war by
marketing bonds for the government. The securities they sold proved
a good investment with the rise in bonds after the war, and
ofjay Cooke tliey **ad a large cn*entelle among sober and thrifty inves-
and Co. ' tors- After the war they began to deal in railroad bonds
The Northern Pacific was then being built through a wide
undeveloped area, and this firm undertook to finance it. They took
its bonds in exchange for cash, expecting to sell them and take other
bonds as construction proceeded. For some time the plan worked
well, but always some bonds were left on their hands, and all their
resources, with much of their credit, was embarked in Northern Pacific
securities which were not sold. The road was well planned, but could
not make money for some years. What Jay Cooke and Co. was doing
for this enterprise other bankers were doing for others. Thus it
happened that the capitalists by 1873 were stocked with vast quan-
tities of bonds which the public could not buy. In May, 1873, there
was a sharp local panic in Vienna. Europe, also, recovering from
the Franco-Prussian war, had been speculating largely, and took the
Austrian recession as a sign of danger. Her financiers became cau-
tious and ceased to buy American bonds. The situation might
seem to demand curtailment of railroad construction, but that
was difficult, since material was ordered, and contracts and labor en-
gaged for a long time ahead. Jay Cooke and Co. used their utmost
effort to keep the Northern Pacific in funds, hoping all the time that
a better market might enable them to dispose of their growing stock
of securities.
On September 18, 1873, they had exhausted their last effort and
announced that they were bankrupt. The news produced conster-
. nation. The firm's failure seemed to import the crumbling
1873° C °f ^6 verv foundations of credit. Leading stocks fell from
twenty to thirty points in a day, and September 19 saw
the failure of nineteen of the most reputable New York firms. The
stock exchange rang with offers to sell stocks at ruinous prices, with
no one to buy. On the twentieth the committee in charge stopped
the demoralization by closing the exchange, and it remained closed
for eight days. Money was so scarce that the clearing house issued
clearing-house certificates to banks for 75 per cent of the amount of
good securities, and received them in the settlement of balances.
People who had money withdrew it from the banks to hoard until
confidence was restored. This produced runs on the banks, and three
failed on the twentieth. So strong was the tendency to hoard that
PROLONGED HARD TIMES
667
the banks ceased to pay large checks but indorsed them " Good through
the clearing house." By such efforts the terror was stayed, but it
was not until the end of September that the public felt that the worst
had passed.
In the early stage the panic reached only the speculators in stocks
and bonds, but it soon spread to all branches of industry. The
financiers could no longer furnish money, and railroad
building was curtailed. Manufacturers of material found
their orders countermanded, laborers in factories and on
railroads were thrown out of employment, the general purchasing
power of the community was lessened, manufactures of general mer-
chandise must cut down production, and in the face of the resulting
depression land and other speculation in ten thousand localities
collapsed. The "hard times" were general and severe.
They were destined to last several years. The crisis happened just
as the agriculture of the world entered a new stage of its progress.
In 1866 Prussia and Austria were at war, and in 1870-1871
Germany conquered France. The intervening period and J?.*1*1 ,
J ' i r ^ • ' i , • T- Tunes Pro-
these years also were a period of unrest in industry in Eu- ionged.
rope, and production there was limited. As a consequence,
we exported large quantities of grain at the high prices which sur-
vived the war. Wheat often brought $2.50 a bushel during the war;
in 1867 it reached $2.85 in Chicago, and $2.00 a bushel was for a long
time a reasonable price. These high prices were the cause of a strong
movement to the Western lands, a movement which once formed no
hard times could quickly check. The return of peace in Europe threw
vast energy into agriculture there. At the same time extension of
railroads into the wheat-growing plains of Russia opened a large new
area of production. In three years, 1875 to 1878, the world's wheat
increased 262,000,000 bushels. The fall in price was startling. In
1872 it was $ 1.38 a bushel in gold, in 1878 it reached 98 cents.
As the land-hungry people of our West cut up county after county
into homesteads in the face of this increasing general distress, the West-
ern farmer settled down to financial misery. He was in debt for his
land, or his improvements, and, each succeeding crop failing to lift
the growing burden, his gloom but increased. In the middle years of
the eighth decade, late in the ninth and early in the tenth he was in
a stage approaching desperation, and the effects were seen in more than
one plan for relief through governmental action. So long did wheat
sell at about ninety cents a bushel, that experienced operators in the
grain market said openly that the world would never again see " dollar
wheat." They were unduly discouraged. The world's wheat supply
had only run ahead of the demand, and in the United States the excess
was marked. But in time the world's demand would increase rela-
tively with the supply : then, and not sooner, would prosperity return
permanently to the American wheat farmer.
668 ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
RESUMPTION OF SPECIE PAYMENT
After the panic of 1873 many people came to see that the too
rapid progress which preceded it was partly due to the inflated con-
dition of the currency; and this strengthened the desire
Resumption of business people to see legal tender redeemed in specie,
le* s°Diffl- -^ was noted> also> that at the intimation of hoarding the
cult. public preferred greenbacks to national banknotes, and this
seemed to show that if resumption were attempted the legal
tender notes would not be offered in large quantities for redemption.
It was further evident that the increasing volume of business was ab-
sorbing the amount of these notes in the channels of trade, as was
shown by the steady fall in the premium on gold, until January i,
1874, it was no. The conclusion of thoughtful men was that re-
sumption was easier in 1874 than in McCulloch's day.
But the ruling hard times were a serious impediment. They gave
rise to a widespread belief that the volume of money was inadequate
and ought to be increased by congress. This sentiment
The was so strong that in the panic of 1873 the secretary was
Popular impelled to exchange for bonds $26,000,000 of legal
Demand for tender which McCulloch withdrew but did not destroy,
more Legal thus raising the amount outstanding to $382,000,000.
The secretary would go no further of his own authority,
and then congress took up the matter, passing, February
4, 1874, a bill to increase the outstanding amount by $18,000,000.
The house passed the bill by a large majority, so strong was inflation
with its members ; but the senate, more conservative, gave the bill a
majority of only five. It was evident that the country was swinging
back toward paper money. Under these circumstances Grant's veto
of the bill was an act of heroism. It was denounced in the West as
truckling to the Eastern capitalists, and it was an important cause
of the republican defeat in the elections of the following autumn.
This stunning blow put the republican leaders- to thinking. Hitherto
bent chiefly on carrying their Southern policy, they had been in-
clined to pay respectful attention to the West; for it
New was easier to "wave the bloody shirt" there than in the
Polk1"1? East. But that issue was receding, finances and currency
thVife- were becoming prominent, and they must decide whether
publicans. they would depend on the inflationists or on the sound
financial ideas prevalent among all classes in the East.
They wisely chose the latter, losing strength in the West, no doubt,
but hoping to make up the loss in the East. The party was to do essen-
tially the same thing twenty years later with reference to another
financial issue', the free coinage of silver. The result of the choice
of 1874 was the resumption act of January, 1875, passed in the last
A "DEATH-BED REPENTANCE" 669
days of republican power. The East received it gladly, and pro-
nounced it " the death-bed repentance of the republican party." The
West denounced it ; but the conditions were such that they could not
repeal it in the succeeding congress. In fact, the West was yielding
to the march of capitalistic industry in the transalleghany region.
As the states there ceased to be dominated by the agricultural classes
they gave up the cause of inflation. This was shown when in 1875
Hayes was chosen governor of Ohio on a sound financial platform.
The resumption law of 1875 was championed by John Sherman,
whose political insight showed him the shifting nature of the situation
before him. It provided that the legal tender notes be
retired as new national bank notes were issued until the
greenbacks outstanding were $300,000,000. This, it was
thought, would reduce the issue of the latter to an amount
which could be safely managed by the treasury. January i, 1879,
so the law ran, the secretary of the treasury should begin actually
to redeem in specie. To get gold for that purpose and to maintain
resumption he was to sell bonds for coin until he had $100,000,000
of specie on hand. This specie was not to be a special reserve fund,
but the law contemplated that it be left in the general fund in the
treasury ; and it was, therefore, liable to be drawn upon to defray the
expenses of government. When in Cleveland's second term the
revenues failed through the inadequacy of the McKinley tariff law to
meet the large appropriations of 1890, this fund was seriously impaired
to save the treasury from bankruptcy. It was then maintained that
the law of 1875 authorized future and indefinite bond sales to maintain
an adequate reserve to redeem the paper currency. Much controversy
arose over that situation, but it did not trouble the men of 1875.
The law they passed was a long step toward the restoration of sound
financial conditions, and secured in 1879 the object for which it was
enacted. It is generally conceded that had McCulloch's advice been
taken, the same result might have been reached several years earlier.
DIPLOMATIC AFFAIRS UNDER GRANT
The union emerged from the civil war with increased force at home
and abroad. We were ourselves conscious of ability to play a larger
part than formerly in international affairs. Our eyes
were particularly directed to the states south of us, and The Civil
there was observable an enthusiastic hope that our power JJJj!^ J~
would be increased in that quarter. Two questions re- ou^Dipio-
mained to be settled at the end of the war ; the removal macy.
of the French from Mexico and the adjustment of our
claims on England for failure to enforce her neutrality obligations.
Both problems were taken up in Johnson's administration, and the
first was settled by excellent handling under Seward's direction.
670 ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
The other went over to Grant's first term, and the glory of solving it
fell to Fish, his secretary of state.
But Seward failed in the English negotiations, not so much on
account of his own deficiencies as those of other men. Charles
Francis Adams, minister throughout the war, remained
Our Claims ^ Lonclon after the return of peace ; but he had been so
England. persistent a fighter for American rights during the struggle
that he was not the man to conduct the delicate negotia-
tion the present problem demanded. His demands accomplished
nothing, and in 1868 he was succeeded by Reverdy Johnson, of Mary-
land. His warm manners, so much in contrast with the correct and
cool air of his predecessor, pleased the English, and he was received
with a friendliness that convinced him he should succeed in his chief
business. England on her part had been given opportunity to reflect
on her position. Her covert aid to the confederates was chiefly from
sentiment, and time brought reason into play. As the greatest trad-
ing power on the sea she was peculiarly interested in establishing rules
to protect neutral commerce in time of war. If she herself should be
engaged with an enemy, the United States, by following the course
she had followed with regard to the confederacy, could let loose such
a fleet of commerce-destroyers as her merchants would never forget.
She was willing, therefore, to settle the claims, but she did not dream
of paying what we asked. Most Englishmen of the day thought
Americans shrewd, grasping, and given to swaggering, and they did
not take seriously the amount of our demand.
Seward and Johnson both wished to settle the claims for the credit
it would give the administration, and for this reason the radicals
would willingly have the negotiations fail. Reverdy John-
Johnson in son snared the anxiety of his superiors, and in trying to
England. accomplish the task, his eagerness led him to bungle it
sadly. He caught at the signs of complaisance in Eng-
land, forgot all the rebuffs offered his predecessor, and revelled in acts
of good will. He made many speeches to English audiences in the
warmest tone of friendship, and went out of his way to show partiality
for public men who had most espoused the confederate cause. This
made a favorable impression on the British, but to Americans it
seemed that he discredited Adams and threw away the national dig-
nity. The radicals, desiring to weaken the administration at every
possible point, made much of his failings. Johnson had his faults,
no doubt, but it is also certain that the country was not disposed to
be fair toward him.
The agreement this American minister made was known as the
Johnson-Clarendon convention. It provided for a commission to
select an arbiter to whom should be referred for settlement all the
disputed claims on each side, the decision of the arbiter to be final.
Two commissioners were to be named by each side, and if they could
"OUTRAGEOUS" DEMANDS 671
not agree on the arbiter, he was to be chosen by lot. Probably a
settlement like this would have been acceptable in the United States
within a year after the end of the war ; but what with
the feeling aroused against Johnson and the national self- The
assurance from the success in the Mexican affair, the Jia«mi<m
nation would not tolerate it in 1869. It was especially Convention,
bad to submit our rights in the matter to the choice of an
arbiter by lot. The convention was completed January 14, 1869,
and went to the senate soon afterwards. It came up there April 13,
when Andrew Johnson was no longer president, and was defeated by a
vote of 54 to i. Sumner alone spoke against it. As chairman of the
senate's foreign committee he felt it his duty to sum up the case for
the United States, and his speech was printed for the information of
the people.
Through his bold handling, our case against England became far-
reaching. He demanded satisfaction, first for all the losses of Ameri-
cans through England's recognition of belligerency for the
confederacy, secondly for losses due to the activity of the
Alabama and other ships which England's negligence
suffered to take the sea, and thirdly for the expenses of
prolonging the war through the hope of the South that England would
assist her. From the first class, he said, the losses amounted to
$100,000,000, from the second to $15,000,000, and from the third the
inference was — although he would name no figure — a loss of
$2,000,000,000. Mr. Rhodes pronounces Sumner's claim "out-
rageous." It is evident that Sumner himself did not expect England
to pay the amounts specified, but stated them in this way so that
England and the world might realize the vast wrong done us. But it
was an unwise utterance. It raised too high the expectation of the
American people, and if it were insisted upon by the government, it
made impossible further negotiation by England. John Bright, one
of our best friends in England, said that either Sumner was a fool or
thought the English people were fools. No immediate action, how-
ever, followed the speech, and after a time the passions it raised were
cooled by sober thought. It was for the skillful hand of Hamilton
Fish, Grant's secretary of state, to reopen the question in a more
reasonable spirit and carry it to successful solution. Before this
could be done, Grant precipitated his ill-advised project to annex
Santo Domingo.
This negro republic, occupying the eastern part of the Island of
Haiti, was threatened with revolution. Its ruler thought
he would have a safe exit from difficulties he could hardly Grant's
hope to surmount, if he sold his country to the United D^?ngo
States, he himself to get most of the purchase price. Treaty.
Grant was approached, and saw in the scheme an excel-
lent opportunity to acquire a valuable territory. The minions of
672 ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
jobbery who surrounded him approved the scheme, and he sent one
of them, Babcock, to Santo Domingo to investigate the proposition.
Babcock was only an unofficial agent of the president, but he did not
hesitate to act as if he were a commissioner with full powers. He
returned with glowing accounts of the riches of the country, and with
boxes of minerals and other products to substantiate his words. He
brought, also, an informal treaty of annexation. At a succeeding
cabinet meeting Grant submitted the treaty and displayed Babcock's
collection of specimens. It was the first time the secretary of state
or any of his colleagues were informed of the affair. The communi-
cation was received in silence and astonishment. Cox found his
tongue long enough to ask if we wanted to annex Santo Domingo.
There was then an embarrassing pause, which the president ended by
taking up other business.
It was not like Grant to give up a thing to which he had once com-
mitted himself. He sent Babcock back to Santo Domingo with the
necessary power, and in due time the treaty came to Washington in
regular form and was sent to the senate for ratification. Grant
exerted himself in its behalf. He saw Sumner, and evidently under-
stood the chairman of the committee on foreign affairs to promise to
favor it; but when it came from the committee it was reported
adversely, and the chairman was one of its opponents. Grant was dis-
appointed, and as the outspoken Sumner supported his opposition
with a speech, a bitter quarrel resulted. The two-thirds majority
necessary to ratification could not be obtained, and the project was
defeated. In 1870 Grant sent it to congress again and asked for a
joint resolution for annexation; but public opinion had now been
aroused against it, and all he could get was a committee to visit Santo
Domingo to investigate the situation there. The report favored an-
nexation, but the senate did not act on the report. Grant was
chagrined at his failure. His quarrel with Sumner progressed with
increased vehemence, and the anger of the senator brought estrange-
ment between him and Fish. At last in 1871 the president insisted
that the senate's committee on foreign affairs should have a
new head, and his influence was sufficient to secure his desire.
Sumner was deeply disappointed. He had served long and faith-
fully in this important position, and his displacement in connection
with his part in this particular incident brought him much sym-
pathy.
Fish did not approve of the Santo Domingo treaty, but supported
it through loyalty to his superior. In return he was allowed a free
hand in negotiations with Great Britain, a far more im-
ofWash^7 Portant matter. He pressed that affair wisely and steadily,
ton, i87iDg and England yielded so far that January 9, 1871, Sir John
Rose arrived in Washington with authority to make a
treaty to settle all matters of dispute between the two powers. These
THE GENEVA ARBITRATION 673
were the Alabama claims, the rights in fishing on the banks of New-
foundland, and the exact boundary between the United States and
British Columbia in the region of Puget Sound. An agreement
known as the Treaty of Washington was now made in which it was
provided that the first and third questions be determined by tribunals
of arbitration, and the second by a joint commission. The treaty
opened the way to a fair settlement of the Alabama claims by ex-
pressing formally England's regret for the escape of the "Alabama
and other vessels," and for the losses they inflicted. It also adopted
rules defining more strictly than formerly the obligations of a neutral
in avoidance of succor to a belligerent ; and it was evident that if the
proposed tribunal of arbitration followed them, our own cause would
be much strengthened. In accordance with this treaty the German
emperor was selected to arbitrate the northwestern boundary, and
soon rendered a satisfactory decision. The fisheries commission began
deliberation, but encountered many difficulties, and the matter was
not finally adjusted until 1877. The Alabama claims required more
careful consideration.
The tribunal to arbitrate them embraced five members, to be chosen,
one by England, one by the United States, and one each by the rulers
of Italy, Brazil, and Switzerland. The men designated
were Chief Justice Cockburn, of England, Charles Francis JJjaifia
Adams, Count Sclopis, Vicomte d'ltajuba, and Jacques Tribunal.
Staempfli. The two first were well known in their re-
spective countries, and the three last were men of recognized learning
and character. England's position on the sea made her fear to in-
trust her cause to representatives of rival commercial nations; and
she felt that she was more likely to be treated fairly by citizens of
such states as Italy, Brazil, and Switzerland. She was, in fact, in a
difficult position ; for if national feeling was to influence the tribunal,
not even these small nations could be expected to tolerate principles
which smacked of her assertion of superiority at sea.
The tribunal met for the first time December 15, 1871, at Geneva,
but did not open the case until the following summer, at the same
place. The American case was presented by J. C. Ban-
croft Davis, who was appointed for the purpose. His tionstJe^un
instructions were to demand damages for actual losses, at Geneva,
but of his own authority he added demands for losses
through the exclusion of American commerce from the seas and for
the expenses of conducting the war after July 4, 1863. He argued
that the confederacy would have collapsed at that date but for the
countenance it had from England. He thus resurrected Sumner's
sweeping claims of 1869 and took a position Fish had discreetly
abandoned in negotiations previous to the treaty of Washington. His
contention aroused the greatest indignation in England, and the
people there with one voice demanded the dissolution of the tribunal.
2X
674 ECONOMIC AND DIPLOMATIC HISTORY, 1856-1877
Fish was alarmed, and interfered over the head of Davis, intimating
that we would not insist on indirect damages. England was appeased,
and the deliberations proceeded quietly when the tribunal excluded
indirect claims from consideration. The Americans professed satis-
faction at this decision, saying they only brought forward the excluded
claims to have them passed upon definitively.
The question before the tribunal was now a concrete one: Did
England exercise due diligence in regard to the escape of the Alabama,
Florida, and other confederate cruisers? Argument and evidence
was submitted, Adams and Cockburn each presenting the contention
of his own country in an able manner. The decision thus rested with
the arbiters representing the neutral powers. It came late in August,
the neutral members unanimously accepting England's responsibility
in the contention submitted and adjudging her to pay damages to
the amount of $15,500,000. The award occasioned great satisfaction
in America : in England it was received with incredulity. The people
there had not been informed as to the merits of the case : they only
knew they had lost, and the amount of damages conceded seemed
preposterous. It took some reflection to make the judgment accept-
able, but it was at length approved by the ministry, and the money
was paid. At that time Canada was full of unrest, and a revolt against
Britain seemed a possibility. If such an event should come, it was
evident that the United States, if they lost their Alabama case,
would fit out many Alabamas for the benefit of the revolutionists.
With the exception of the Virginius affair (see page 783) the rest of
our diplomacy under Grant was uneventful.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For general works, original sources, biographies, and writings of leading men see
Bibliographical Notes on chapters XXVIII, XXIX, and XXX.
For references on economic subjects see : Dewey, Financial History of the United
States (1903) ; Bogart, Economic History of the United States (1907) ; Bolles, Finan-
cial History of the United States, 1861-1885 (ed. 1884) ; Noyes, Thirty Years of
Finance (1898), reissued in revised form as Forty Years of Finance (1909), an excel-
lent book; Knox, The United States Notes (ed. 1888) ; Ibid., History of Banking in
the United States (1900) ; White, Money and Banking (ed. 1902) ; Burton, Financial
Crises (1902) ; Stanwood, American Tariff Controversies, 2 vols. (1903) ; Taussig,
Tariff History of the United States (ed. 1899) ; Curtiss, The Industrial Development of
Nations, 3 vols. (1912), an important work, the third volume of which treats Ameri-
can industry.
On diplomatic matters see : Moore, Digest of International Law, 8 vols. (1906) ;
Bancroft, Life of Seward, 2 vols. (1900) ; Foster, A Century of American Diplomacy
(1900) ; Ibid., American Diplomacy in the Orient (1903) ; C. F. Adams, 2d, Lee at
Appomattox and other Papers (1902), has a paper on the treaty of Washington;
Chamberlain, Charles Sumner and the Treaty of Washington (1902) ; Chadwick,
Relations of the United States and Spain, Diplomacy, 2 vols. (1909); Latane",
Diplomatic Relations of the United States and Latin America (1900). _
For references on immigration see : Smith, Emigration and Immigration (1892) ;
Hall, Immigration and Its Effects upon the United States (1907) ; Austin, Immigra-
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
675
tion into the United Stales, 1820-1903 (Bureau of Statistics, Treasury Dept.,
1903)-
For Independent Reading
Burton, John Sherman (1906) ; McCulloch, Men and Measures (1888) ; Williams,
Anson Burlinghame, and the First Chinese Mission (1912); Foster, A Century of
American Diplomacy (1900); and The Harriman Alaska Expedition, Alaska, 2
vols. (1901).
CHAPTER XXXII
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION
IN 1860 civilization had marked out for its own all the domain of
the United States from the Atlantic to a line running with the western
borders of Minnesota and Iowa, across the center of
Physical Nebraska and Kansas, along the western limits of Arkansas
istic?0 and across Texas at nearly its middle points. It had also
established itself on the Pacific coast, holding in a thin
line most of California and a great deal of the Columbia valley in
Oregon and Washington ; and there were a few settlements of Spanish
origin in New Mexico. All the rest of the Far West, plain, mountain,
and desert, was uninhabited by white men, save for the Mormon
settlement in northern Utah and for some hardy fur traders who had
founded stations among the Indians — chiefly in the upper Missouri
valley. It was a vast region, a thousand miles from east to west, and
nearly as much from north to south. Its rivers were not numerous,
its rainfall was less than that of the central Mississippi valley, and it
did not attract the agriculturalist as much as the region to the east.
It was inhabited by powerful Indian tribes, suspicious of the encroach-
ments of the whites, and capable, in case of necessity, of making a
determined stand against invasion from either east or west. They
had been driven before the advancing frontier for many decades, and
as they saw a new rim of settlements planted on the Pacific border
they realized that they were caught between two movements which
threatened to close on them in final destruction. The years between
1860 and 1880 were destined to realize all their fears. Their game,
their homes, their very tribal organization were to go step, by step,
until at last their hunting grounds were theirs no more and they
themselves were fain to accept American citizenship. It was the last
struggle of barbarism and hard nature on the one hand against civili-
zation and the will of the white man on the other; for this vast
region, with its ramparts of stone, its stretches of alkali plain, and
its area of stunted grass interlaced by river valleys, had riches which
the world demanded, and which nature must at last give up.
The first notable invasion of the white man was made by the
676
GOLD AND SILVER MINING 677
hunters of gold and silver. The discovery of the former metal in
California created the supposition that more could be
found in the Rockies, and an army of prospectors explored ™teh£ dven
the country. Though many left their bones in forgotten Miners,
valleys, others found precious hordes, opened fields of
industry, settled towns, and established regular roads of approach.
They made the region a white man's country, rolled back the veil of
mystery which hung over the Far West, and cleared the way for
herdsmen and farmers who discovered the favored spots in which
could be planted farm and hamlet.
The first notable mining success in this region was in "the Washoe
Country," then a portion of Utah. In 1859 a rich silver deposit
was discovered high up on the side of Mount Davidson,
6000 feet above the sea. A throng of miners flocked
thither at once, shafts were sunk, and much ore was
extracted. The veins were rich, but "dipped" downward and made
deep shafts necessary, and into these came water faster then the
pump could draw it off. Then a wonderful engineering feat was per-
formed. Sutro, an inventive genius, constructed a great tunnel to
which his contemporaries gave his name. It came in from the side
of the mountain 2000 feet before the opening of the mines, and by a
network of branches carried the water in the flooded shafts into the
plain at the foot of the mountain. The destruction of the mines was
averted, the region continued to prosper, and out of the mining camps
grew a definite community which took the name, Virginia City. It
was a long way from Sacramento, the seat of authority, and the settlers
desired a more regular government than California could give. In
1 86 1 the people asked for a territorial form of government, and the
request was granted. Three years later came other honors : congress
admitted it into the union as the state of Nevada, chiefly because
two more free-state members were desired in the senate. At that
time the state was thought to have a bright future. But most of
its area was hopelessly arid, and later growth was extremely slow.
It is only in the most recent years that the growth of population has
been enough to warrant the gift of statehood in 1864. Gold as
well as silver was mined in the region of Virginia City, called sometimes
the Comstock region, from the name of its chief lode, and the two
metals taken out of the earth in the first twenty-five years were
worth $300,000,000.
Other mining ventures resulted in the founding of Colorado. In
1858 gold was discovered at Idaho Springs, 750 miles east of Virginia
City and in the eastern spurs of the Rocky Mountains. Colorado
A stream of adventurers soon turned thither, and the sur-
rounding country was explored. Other finds resulted in the settle-
ments at Boulder, Denver, and Leadville. At the last-named place
the lead deposits in connection with silver yielded much the greater
678 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
profit. In 1 86 1 congress created the territory of Colorado, to em-
brace these several communities, and in 1876 the territory became a
state.
Six hundred miles to the northwest, on the eastern slope of the
Rockies, in 1861, there was another rich discovery of gold. An im-
Montana mense number of miners went into the country, and many
profitable mines were worked. From one, the Alder
Gulch, they took in three years $25,000,000 in gold. In the midst of
this rich region grew up the town of Helena, at a place first called
"Last Chance Gulch." The surrounding country yielded fast to the
miners, and in 1864 it was organized into the territory of Montana.
But it was far away in the northwest, and agriculture and grazing
developed slowly. It was not until 1889 that it became a state.
The first gold mined was washed out of the earth in basins, or
"cradles," and this was called placer mining. It was slow and
wasteful, and was only possible when the dust was found
Mining jn graveL But much of the deposit was in quartz veins,
and Lawsf an<^ ^ was necessary to crush the stone and remove the
metal by chemical process. Placer mining was practiced
by individuals working singly or in small partnerships, and it required
little capital. Quartz mining, however, required large enterprises.
Companies were formed, machinery was installed, and the industry
went into the stage of capitalistic production. The policy of the
government toward the miners was very liberal. Mines were given
to those who discovered or first, claimed them on the same principle
that homesteads were given free to farmers. A prospector might
stake off any unclaimed surface and begin to dig. There were many
such claims on every stream which seemed likely to yield gold, and
the large majority were abandoned and lapsed. The country was
wild, the miners were reckless, and the ownership of many claims was
disputed. Most of the paying claims were eventually purchased by
the mining companies. No part of the wealth taken from the earth
was reserved by the government. No other nation has given away
its rich gold and silver mines so recklessly.
Hundreds of the adventurers in this broad country failed to find
the precious metals, and becoming discouraged settled down as farmers,
herdsmen, or hunters where the locality pleased them.
Wyoming Sometimes, also, members of the caravans that toiled
westward to California lost heart and turned settlers.
As the mining country developed, such agricultural communities found
a market for food and cattle. Thus came into existence
NewMezico fae communities organized as Idaho Territory in 1863
Arizona. an<^ Wyoming Territory in 1868. The region of the old
Spanish settlements was also explored by the searchers
for gold. Thus New Mexico received a share of the immigration,
although its stores of gold and silver were not so great as those in the
SETTLEMENT OF UTAH 679
regions to the northward ; and under this impulse Arizona Territory
was erected in 1863. Agriculture, however, promised little both here
and in New Mexico.
In 1874 General Custer was in the Black Hills seeking the hostile
Sioux. Among his followers were some who had been miners and
who recognized traces of gold. Investigation showed a
considerable quantity of the metal in the southwest corner ^°r .m
of what is now South Dakota. The discovery attracted
attention, and miners came to begin operations, but the region was
so remote from railroads that little progress was made for ten years.
It was the easternmost phase of the gold-seeking movement which
did so much for the development of the Rocky mountain region.
Meanwhile the eastern part of Dakota had been reached by the
wave of agricultural settlers. The territory had been erected in
1 86 1. Soon after the war, settlements were made along the upper
Missouri valley. The land was the home of the fierce Sioux, who
resented the approach of white men. But between the miners of
the Black Hills and the farmers around Yankton they could have no
chance of ultimate success. Their appeal to arms was unsuccessful
(see page 683), and a series of treaties were forced from them by which
from 1876 on they ceded their lands, which the government threw
open to settlement. In 1887 the people were so numerous that they
applied for statehood, agreeing to divide their country into two
states, North and South Dakota. Their request was granted in 1889.
Utah alone of the Far West remains to be mentioned The region
from the Wasatch Mountains to California was spoken of in 1845 as
the " Great American Desert." Much of it was entirely arid, and the
rest partly so. In the northern part, west of the mountains, was the
Great Salt Lake and west of that the Salt Lake Desert. To this
region, shunned alike by travelers and trappers, came Brigham Young
and some Mormons in 1847. Some of the party wished to settle in
the fertile California valleys, but the leader ordered otherwise. He
desired to escape the intrusion of his opponents, and he knew it could
not be done in California. "If the Gentiles," he said, "will let us
alone for ten years, I'll ask no odds of them." His band was only
the advanced guard of his whole church, who followed soon afterwards,
settling wherever an oasis promised fertile soil. They quickly
learned that the earth was very rich when watered by irrigation. In
less than ten years their grain fields and herds provided them with
abundance. They learned how to conciliate the neighboring Indians,
the fierce Utes, and from the name of that tribe came Utah, the name
of the new settlement. In 1849 came the wagon trains bound to Cal-
ifornia, breaking into the Mormons' coveted isolation ; but the caravans
purchased supplies for the journey at good prices. Less than twenty
years later came the Union Pacific railroad, and Utah was opened to
the outside world. Now the "Gentiles," some of them apostates and
68o THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
many more actual settlers, became a large part of the population,
and between them and the strongly organized church of the settlers
arose many a conflict. An active propaganda brought converts and
settlers from many parts of the world. The powerful Mormon hier-
archy directed everything, religious, economic, and social. Polygamy
also helped in the rapid increase of the population, but it brought
down the condemnation of the American people generally. Thus,
the territory, organized in 1850, was denied statehood for many
years. It was not until after the church denounced the practice in
1890 that congress began to tliink seriously of admitting Utah into
the union.1
THE TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILROADS
The growth of the Far West was dependent upon railroads. As
soon as we acquired California men began to talk of a railroad to the
Pacific, but nothing definite was done. The civil war
brought home to the government the exposed position of
that region, and the result was two acts, 1862 and 1864,
authorizing the construction of a transcontinental line.
It was to be in two railroads, the Union Pacific, from the
frontier to a point near Salt Lake, in Utah, and the Central Pacific,
from Sacramento to connect with the Union Pacific. In aid of each
division the government lent its bonds at the rate of $16,000 a mile
for the part of the line that crossed the plains, $32,000 a mile for the
part in the hill country, and $48,000 for the part in the mountains.
The loan should be secured by a second mortgage on the property.
Besides this, the roads were to have ten alternate sections on each side
of the road within each mile of track and extending back twenty miles.
1 The following table shows the development of the Far West from the earliest time to
the present.
The Union
Pacific and
the Central
Pacific.
;*
POPULATION
o_ ._
< o
<•
bTATE
k
3S
££
1850
1860
1870
1880
1890
1900
1910
Utah .
1850
1896
11,380
40,273
86,786
143,963
207,905
270,749
373,351
Nevada
1861
1864
6,857
42,491
62,266
45,76i
42,335
81,875
Colorado
1861
1876
34,277
39,864
194,327
412,198
539,700
799,024
Arizona
1863
1912
9,658
40,440
59,620
122,931
204,354
Idaho .
1863
1890
14,999
32,610
84,385
161,772
325,594
Montana
1864
1889
20,595
39,159
132,159
243,329
376,053
Wyoming
1868
1890
9,118
20,789
60,705
92,531
154,145
New Mexico
1850
1912
6i,S47
93,5i6
91,874
119,565
160,282
I95,3io
327,301
Dakota .
1861
14,181
135,177
North Dakota
1889
190,983
319,146
577,056
South Dakota
1889
348,600
401,570
583,888
THE RAILROADS TO THE PACIFIC 681
The selection of the eastern terminus was preceded by much con-
troversy. In the Middle West St. Louis and Chicago were the com-
mercial competitors, and each wished to be on the main
line to the Pacific. The former suggested that the road Rivalry
begin at the western boundary of Kansas, connecting g**J*"
with a proposed road from Kansas City to this beginning, an'd °'
and as Kansas City was connected with St. Louis by an- Chicago,
other road this would make nearly an air-line communica-
tion from St. Louis to the junction in Utah. Chicago, on the other
hand, was connected with the Missouri river by lines extended to
Council Bluffs, Iowa, and desired the new road to start at Omaha,
opposite their western end, to pass through the southern part of
Nebraska and Wyoming straight to northern Utah. Each side pre-
sented its claims to congress. Chicago had the support of the lake
states, New York, and New England, all in more or less direct com-
munication with the northern route. St. Louis would ordinarily
rely on the South for support, but the South was not represented in
congress in 1862, and the result was Chicago won, spite of the fact
that her route was the longer of the two by nearly the length of Ne-
braska. St. Louis's feelings were partially salved by a branch line
to run from some place in Missouri to a junction point on the main
line in southern Nebraska. It was because this compromise sought
to unite the two plans that the road was called the Union Pacific.
The Central Pacific was a California corporation, but congress gave
it the same aid and privileges as the Union Pacific ; and concessions
were also made to the connecting branches in Nebraska and Kansas.
The land granted in aid of these roads was a total of 33,000,000
acres, an area larger than the state of New York. The two main lines
were completed in 1869.
The discussion of these plans brought suggestions for several other
routes. One was for the Northern Pacific from St. Paul or some
point on Lake Superior through Dakota, Montana, Idaho,
and Washington to Puget Sound on the Columbia river. Jh®
It was pointed out that it would pass through a more pacific
fertile region than the route through Utah and Nevada,
and that it could be carried over the Rockies less expensively. The
projectors were able to get a charter in 1864. Bonds were not lent,
but the road received lands amounting to more than 40,000,000 acres.
It was not until 1870 that work actually began, and this beginning
was interrupted by the panic of 1873. The road was reorganized in
1875, and in 1883 it had reached the western slope of the Rocky
Mountains, near Helena, Montana. It was not until ten years later
that it completed a connection with Puget Sound.
In 1866 congress gave a charter to the Atlantic and Pacific, to
begin in Missouri and run through New Mexico to the
Colorado river, thence to the Pacific. It was authorized
682 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
to connect with the Southern Pacific, already incorporated by
the state of California. From the earliest consideration of a trans-
continental line a southern route uniting the lower Mis-
Atlantic and s*ssiPPi witn California through Texas and New Mexico
Pacific.0 * had been urged, and Jefferson Davis, when secretary of
war under Pierce, had given much effort to bring it into
reality. But more important matters intervened, and during the
war nobody urged a southern road to the Pacific. The
Santa Fe" return of peace brought a renewal of the plan, and the
System. Atlantic and Pacific charter was a revival of the old idea,
but with St. Louis instead of New Orleans for the eastern
terminus. The proposition was not practicable, and the road as
planned was not built. But the project was eventually
Southern combined with others, and the result was the Santa Fe
Pacific. system. Meanwhile the Southern Pacific, of its own
accord, acquiring lines through Texas, came at last to the
Gulf, thus completing the fifth line from the Mississippi valley to the
Pacific. Still a sixth was to be constructed, the Great
Northern. Northern, from Duluth, on Lake Superior, to Puget
Sound.
These roads were vital forces in the settlement of the Far West.
They were built at vast cost, and it was predicted they would never
pay expenses, for they were mostly in advance of the
of°Con-°nS settlement of the country they penetrated. The earliest
struction. invaded the homes of the Indians, and troops were needed
to protect the construction gangs. Most of the engineers
and many of the laborers had served in the civil war. They carried
rifles to their work, and many a time dropped pick and spade to beat
off the savages. But the iron bands they laid at length united East
and West and heralded the advent of cities, farms, and common-
wealths.
Valuable as these roads were, it seems evident that the aid they
received from the federal government was more liberal than was
necessary. The bonds lent the Union and Central Pacific
Government aggreSated $55,ooo,ooo. Long stretches of the former
j£™ road were built for less than the bonds the company got.
When the roads reached the level plains of Utah, each com-
pany rushed operations to get the largest possible part of the profit-
paying mileage. Parallel roadbeds were actually constructed for
miles, each company hoping to outstrip the other in laying the rails.
The Central Pacific, in order to get the promised $48,000 a mile for
construction through the mountains, asserted boldly that the Sierras
came to within the neighborhood of Sacramento, and by means of a
specially prepared map induced President Lincoln to decide that they
came within 24 miles of that town. Issuing charters and amending
them gave rise to much lobbying, and the impression was created
THE INDIAN ALARMED 683
that irregularities were practiced. The vast land grants especially
seemed unwarranted. From 1850 to 1871 congress voted to railroads
an acreage five times as large as that of Pennsylvania, to be actually
granted as the roads were constructed. By 1902 less than two-thirds
of this had been handed over to the roads. In 1890 it was enacted
that lands reserved in fulfillment of promises to railroads not com-
pleted should be subject to other bestowal. Important political
movements grew out of the popular dissatisfaction with these power-
ful agents in the industrial life of the Far West.
INDIAN WARS
The advent of the whites alarmed the Indian. He saw with in-
creasing ill will the ordinary tokens of occupation. The wandering
gold hunters were tolerated, unless they could be killed
for their plunder, but after them came the mining towns.
The caravans winding across the country were robbed,
but there was not concerted war against them, for they
always passed through. After these came the railroads, and who
could doubt their permanency ? Out of the Indian's fears came his
hostility, manifesting itself in many acts of violence. Such acts led
to reprisals by the whites, and thus was created a state of irritation
which made war easy.
The Indian's bitterest complaint was the destruction of game. The
buffalo herds were his harvest fields, furnishing food and clothing, and
through the sale of hides his chief source of ready money.
He found them in numbers on the plains, and hunted J>fets^uction
yearly without visibly depleting the supply ; and smaller Game,
game was abundant. When the white men appeared this
vast food supply began to be exterminated. The gangs of railroad
builders subsisted on it, which was to be expected. Then came those
who slew for sport, and others, far more wasteful, who slew for hides.
In three years, 1872—1874, the loss was 4,500,000, two-thirds for
the hides. In 1868 vast herds of buffalo were seen from the windows
of the Kansas Pacific railroad trains, and sometimes the engine must
stop to allow them to cross the track. A few years later a traveler
rarely saw a group of more than twenty. The government took no
interest in this wanton waste of an important food supply, but to the
Indian it meant suffering, and it aroused his sense of shame that his
interests were ignored.
In 1850 the important Indian tribes east of the Rocky mountains
were the Sioux, in what is now the Dakotas, the Cheyennes, in the val-
leys of the Yellowstone and North Platte, the Arapahoes,
associated with the Cheyennes, the Crows, west of the {££ Bribes.
Cheyennes and Arapahoes, and the Assiniboins, north of
the Cheyennes and extending into British America. These were
684 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
chiefly in the great upper Missouri valley and blocked the ordinary
routes to the Pacific. To insure their good will a treaty was made
with them in 1851 at Fort Laramie. The senate did not ratify it,
but the Indians thought it effective, and some features of it were
executed. It secured peace for a time. South of these tribes, beyond
the Arkansas, lived Comanches, Kiowas, and Apaches,
w*tn wnom a treaty was made also, 1853. It allowed the
whites to construct roads and pass peacefully along them,
and promised the Indians an annuity of goods worth $18,000. Thus
the relations between whites and Indians were maintained on a peace
footing through the sixth decade of the century.
The arrival of the gold hunters in the Montana region alarmed
the southern Cheyennes, and trouble was feared. In 1861 a treaty
was made by which these tribes, and the Arapahoes associated with
them, accepted a reservation of 25,000 square miles in the southeastern
part of Colorado, each tribe to have an annuity of $30,000 for fifteen
years. This was followed by three years of peace, which were at last
broken by the following incident.
In April, 1864, a white man wholly unknown came to an American
military camp within the reservation, saying Indians had taken his
stock. Rumors of Indian depredations were continually
War being circulated, and the troops on the plains were usually
with the willing to reply sharply. In this case a lieutenant and
Cheyennes f°rtv men were sent to disarm the alleged marauders.
and They met a band, some of whose horses were claimed by
Arapahoes. the complainant. The lieutenant ordered them to disarm ;
they resisted for a while, and rode away with their arms
in their hands. They were said to be Cheyennes, and the military
authorities thought they ought to be punished. Next month Major
Downing with a body of troops was sent against the Cheyennes. He
surrounded a sleeping village, killed 26, wounded 30, and burned
lodges and other property. It was an event which might mark the
beginning of war. But the Indians desired peace, and although there
was desultory fighting during the summer, they sent a messenger to the
military commander asking for an agreement. He referred it to the
governor of the territory of Colorado and gave the Indians protection
in the meantime. Relying on his word, about 500 Indians, men,
Chi 'net n' women> an<^ children, gathered at Fort Lyon, where they
Massacre?8 were attacked and slain most cruelly by a regiment of
Colorado soldiers commanded by Colonel Chivington.
Women were shot while praying for mercy, children had their brains
dashed out, and men were tortured and mutilated. War now came
in earnest, the southern Cheyennes and Arapahoes beginning a con-
test which 8000 troops could not end for a year. Finally in October,
1865, a treaty was made, by which the Indians were to have larger
annuities and be moved to a place selected by the president. It
GENERAL SHERMAN AND THE INDIANS 685
satisfied neither party, but there was an interval of peace in Colorado
and western Kansas.
Next year trouble began in the north of the Far Western plain.
The most popular route to the Montana gold fields ran through the
land of the Sioux, by way of the Powder river valley, a
region full of buffalo. The passing caravans killed the
game or frightened it away. The Sioux protested, but
with no result. Then they learned that garrisons were about
to be established on the route, and in December, 1866, went on the war-
path, the northern Cheyennes helping them. The whites retaliated
mercilessly. The superintendent of an express company ordered his
guards to shoot any Indian on sight. General Hancock, commanding
the troops, attacked and pursued whatever band he met. The Sioux
were well mounted and numerous. For two years they cut off travelers,
fell on unprotected posts, annoyed the railroad builders, and raided
the settlement relentlessly. It was the theory of the army that the
red men would never be quiet until they were thoroughly beaten;
and Hancock pushed vigorously against a quick and active foe which
always eluded him.
Meanwhile, the Comanches and Apaches, in New Mexico and Ari-
zona, showed signs of hostility. They had long scourged Mexico
on both sides of the Rio Grand, and they willingly turned
their hands against the new owners of the two territories.
General Carleton commanded in this quarter and gave Apaches,
orders to hunt down the Indians, recognize no flag of truce,
and clear the land for the whites. His severe policy tamed the wild
Comanches and broke the spirit of the Apaches.
In the East this policy of extermination created sympathy for the
objects of it, and congress appointed a commission to visit the tribes,
establish a firm peace, and colonize the Indians in a suit-
able place in the Rocky mountains. The savages were The Indian
generally tired of war, and treaties were made with the
Apaches, Comanches, Kiowas, Cheyennes, and Arapahoes.
But Red Cloud, chief of the warring Sioux, would attend
no council unless the garrisons were withdrawn from the Powder
river. After months of negotiation he was given what he asked, and
in 1868 the frontier was pacific, and the commission took up the second
part of its duty, to devise a means of securing permanent peace.
It proposed to erect a new Indian territory in the western part of
what is now South Dakota, but the dissension of its own members
defeated an agreement. The civilian part approved the proposed
territory and were at first in the majority, but the officers on the com-
mission, General Sherman leading them, favored severity. At last
one civilian changed to the other side, and the report of the com-
mission recommended that the recent treaties be amended and that
the Indian bureau be placed in the war department.
686 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
The policy of conciliation was now checked, and the Indians again
showed a bad spirit. At the same time, General Sheridan was put
over the department of Missouri. None of that sym-
Renewed PatnY ne showed for the freedmen in Louisiana now ap-
1868. peared in his attitude toward the Indians. The Cheyennes
and Arapahoes had not received the annuities promised
in the spring of 1868 by the recent treaty, nor had they been moved
to a reservation, and meantime white settlers crowded into the Indian
home. When General Sheridan visited the plains in 1868 they asked
for a hearing, but he refused to meet them. He had heard and
accepted many stories of their depredations, and was convinced
they should be punished. In November, 1868, therefore, he marched
against the Cheyennes and Arapahoes, then on the Washita, in the
present state of Oklahoma. General Custer with a de-
o'rthtf6 tachment surrounded a sleeping Cheyenne village and
Washita." killed and captured nearly 300 men, women, and children.
This stark way of dealing alarmed the Indians; the
Kiowas and Comanches, weak nations, came in and submitted, but
the Cheyennes and Arapahoes fled northward. They did not escape,
however, for Sheridan pursued, forced them to submit, and thus
crushed resistance in the South.
It was soon reopened in the North. A band of Piegans, a Blackf eet
tribe in Montana, committed outrages and went to the British domain.
They could not be punished, but Sheridan thought it
ftltosacre of wou^ ^ave a &o°d effect to punish their kindred. The
Piegans. Montana authorities remonstrated lest the blow fall on
the innocent. But the general had his way, and January
23, 1870, Colonel Baker, under Sheridan's orders, surprised a Piegan
encampment not charged with wrongdoing and killed 33 men, 90
women, and 50 children, besides taking about 100 prisoners. That
this action was needlessly barbarous cannot be doubted. It gave
rise to a controversy between the military and Indian authorities. On
one side it was charged that the Indian agents wished the Indians
undisturbed because war interfered with the profits of the agents and
the corrupt interests which fattened off the distribution of supplies.
It was also held that the conciliating policy of the civilians
Sheridan's encouraged the savages to defiance. On the other side
Course. ^ was charged that the army was brutal, and that its
avowed policy was extermination. It seems that there
was truth in each contention. It is certain that Sheridan's energy
broke the defiance of the tribes. The young braves ceased to go on
raids, the bands confined themselves to the reservations and hunted
buffaloes where they could be found, and those warriors who had
gone to the British possessions remained there or came back and sub-
mitted. Sheridan's pacification bore fruit for many years.
CAUSE OF THE WAR 687
THE Sioux WAR OF 1876
By the treaty of 1868 the Sioux were to live in the west of what is
now South Dakota. They were given hunting privileges in the
region west of this reservation, and it was agreed that no
white man should settle in, or pass through, this hunting Invasion of
range. Spite of the restriction, white prospectors appeared HUis^b **
there. Here were the Black Hills, rich in gold, to which whites.
General Custer, in 1874, conducted an exploring expedi-
tion. The explorers reported that the country contained gold and
valuable timber, and adventurers began at once to visit it. The
Indians were dissatisfied, and protested in a meeting at the
Red Cloud agency. They were assured that soldiers would remove
the intruders. The miners were, indeed, warned to leave, and prom-
ised to go ; but if they kept their word, they were soon back. They
charged that the Indians stole their stock, which may have been the
fact. The hunting range abounded in game, and some Sioux tribes
spent most of their time there. They were less tractable than their
brethren on the reservation, and felt strong enough to defy the govern-
ment. They had a capable and independent-minded leader, Sitting
Bull, who was daring enough to challenge the American troops in
battle. The people of Montana looked longingly at the rich Black
Hills, and hoped for an occasion to take them.
General Sheridan, apparently ignorant that the treaty of 1868 al-
lowed the Sioux to hunt on the range, determined to punish the wan-
derers, and ordered all the Sioux to return to their reservation by
January 31, 1876. To this the offenders replied that they
were hunting buffalo and would return in the spring. This Sheridan's
was defiance, and in February General Crook took the field. I17^B>
At the same time the Sioux on the reservation were or-
dered to give up their arms and ponies. This alarmed the young
braves there, who escaped to the the open country as they could, the
war spirit hot in them. It was charged that the ponies and arms
actually surrendered were never restored, and that the ponies were
often sold by the authorities as low as $5 each. The war which
followed was fiercely fought by the Indians, probably on account
of the superior ability of Sitting Bull.
Three columns of white troops were sent out, commanded respec-
tively by Generals Crook, Terry, and Gibbon. Crook marched first,
in a winter campaign. He encountered a band under
Crazy Horse, burned their lodges and took their horses. Campaign
But the horses were retaken and the cold weather forced ^^.^V '
the soldiers to return to camp. In the spring campaigning sioux.
was resumed. The Sioux, aided by the northern Chey-
ennes, numbered five or six thousand. In June a portion of them
fought a drawn battle with Crook, and then by a rapid movement
688 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
united all their forces to attack Terry and Gibbon, who were also
united. Terry, not knowing the size of the force threatening him,
sent Custer with 600 cavalry to scatter and pursue it. He found
the Indians commanded by Sitting Bull near the junction of the Big
Horn and the Little Big Horn in southern Montana. They were
about to retreat when they observed the weakness of
Cus!:er's force and. qm'ckly prepared for battle. Con-
Horn. cealing most of their forces in ravines, they displayed the
rest on a ridge and awaited attack. Custer sent one
portion of his command to strike their right, another to fall on their
left, while he with 260 men charged their center. Before he reached
the ridge the concealed host revealed itself and opened fire, and he
was instantly battling for life. At few of the recent encounters when
the whites surprised and wiped out sleeping villages had quarter been
given, and in many cases women and children had been slain by the
soldiers. This was done when Custer fell on the Cheyenne village
at the battle of the Washita. It is not to be expected that the Indians
should have shown less mercy now that Custer and his brave band
rushed on the ridge filled with infuriated Cheyennes and Sioux. Not
a soul survived of the 260 men who followed him up the
Custer ° ridge. The end probably came quickly, for only 52 of
the Indians were killed before the rifles of the whites ceased
to fire. The dead were mutilated — all but Custer, whose impressive
figure and countenance won respect from his enemy. One mingles his
admiration for the gallantry of the heroic Americans with his sym-
pathy for the Indians, whom a hundred wrongs had nerved for the signal
vengeance which chance threw into their hands.
But the battle of the Little Big Horn only prolonged the war,
Sitting Bull remained at large, declaring he would fight until the claim
to the Black Hills was allowed. In August, 1876, congress
The Sioux created the Sioux commission in the interest of peace.
mi °n> They visited the reservation and heard the Indian's story
of his wrongs. It was a pathetic story. One chief said :
"If you white men had a country which was very valuable, which had
always belonged to your people, and which the Great Father had
promised should be yours forever, and men of another race came to
take it away by force, what would your people do? Would they
fight?" Another said bitterly: "Tell your people that since the
Great Father promised that we should never be removed we have been
moved five times ... I think you had better put the Indians on wheels
and you can run them about wherever you wish." The commission
reported that the wrongs of the Indians "were portrayed in colors so
vivid and language so terse that admiration and surprise would have
kept us silent, had not shame and humiliation done so." All the
reservation Sioux were ready for peace. They gave up their hunting
range in exchange for annuities. They were promised schools for
A PATHETIC INCIDENT 689
their children and supplies of food. And those who would remove to
Indian territory were to have aid in moving and lands in severally
when they arrived. But the Sioux were opposed to removal and the
point was not pressed.
Sitting Bull's bands did not join in this settlement, but fled to British
America, suffering many hardships. In 1879 they agreed to return
to the reservation if they were granted amnesty. They came back,
men, women, and children, in great destitution, and Sitting Bull,
defeated but proud, accepted the tame life of the reservation. In
1890 the Sioux were excited by the preaching of an Indian Messiah,
and it was thought prudent to arrest the man most likely to encourage
the movement. He resisted, and was slain with his son. Sitting Bull
was the last great leader of his race, and his defeat meant that the
Ipdian must bow his neck to the yoke of civilization.
We shall see something of the Indian's situation and his persistence
— as well as something of the spirit in which the white men imposed
the yoke — from the story of Dull Knife's Band, north
Cheyennes. In 1877 they were taken to Indian territory. JJjJ ^JJe's
They had intermarried with the Sioux, and farming in the Band.
South was disagreeable to them. They asked permission
to return, but it was the purpose of the government to force them into
civilization, and the request was refused. Then they started north-
ward to the number of 300. They were pursued, fought off the troops
for 480 miles, and were taken prisoners in northern Nebraska. When
told they would be sent southward they refused to go. They were
imprisoned in a fort and left without food, water, blankets, or fire —
although it was January — in hope of breaking their spirits. After
five days they leaped through the windows of the prison, fired at the
guard, and rushed toward the hills carrying their women and children
with them. They were hunted into the hills and many of them killed
before they would surrender. The soldiers would now have given
them up through compassion, but General Crook ordered the chase con-
tinued. Fresh troops were sent out, and the fugitives were surrounded
and forced to a last stand, fighting with desperation. When their
ammunition was exhausted they struck with knives until there only
remained a pile of motionless bodies. Out of the pile the soldiers
took three squaws unhurt, five wounded squaws, and one wounded
buck. These only survived of the 300 who began the journey. The
incident shows how much the tribes of the Far West were demoralized
by the army's policy. They had passed below the stage of strong
tribal resistance. Twelve years of resistance had broken their power
and reduced them to a series of weak and isolated groups, dependent
on the bounty doled out at the agencies.
2Y
690 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
A NEW INDIAN POLICY
The Sioux war and the report of the commission of 1876 called popu-
lar attention to the situation of the Indians, and much was said and
written on the subject. In 1880 the Protestant Episcopal
church urged congress to take steps to protect the ri~ht?
Changing. °f the red men- Other activities followed, and thus it
came about that the government's Indian policy was at
last remodeled. The purport of the reform was to break down the
tribal system and to induce the Indians to become citizens. This
process had been aided, though not intentionally so, in 1871, when
congress ordered that in the future no tribe should be " recognized
as an independent nation . . . with whom the United
No More States may contract by treaty." This language was
Treaties slightly inadequate, since Marshall held in 1831 that an
i87I. * Indian tribe was a " dependent nation"; but it indicated
that the government felt strong enough to take the tribes
directly in hand, and this was a step toward tribal dissolution.
The Dawes act, 1887, marked the culmination of the impulse for
reform in an attempt to secure for the Indians ownership of land in
D severalty. Holdings had been allotted before this, but not
Act iSSy68 ky general law. It was now provided that allotments
be made to such individuals as the president might desig-
nate, to be held in trust for twenty-five years, at the end of which time
the holder was to have full title with the right to sell. When an Indian
received such an allotment in trust he was to become a citizen, with full
personal, property, and political rights. The lands were given in
trust lest he sell them wastefully, and having the ballot was supposed to
be educative. Experience showed some features of the Dawes act
unwise. The Indian became discouraged on account of the long period
he must wait before he had complete title, and this bore hard on the
capable individuals. On the other hand, the majority of the men
were not ready for citizenship, and showed it by their exercise of the
suffrage. They fell into the hands of ringsters, who took them to the
polls in herds and rewarded them for their votes with dinners. More-
over, as a citizen he had the right of a citizen to buy liquor, and the
Dawes act, on that account, increased drunkenness. The law clearly
needed amending.
This was done in the Burke act, 1906, which provided: (i) that
an Indian should not become a citizen when he received land in trust,
but only when he had full title; (2) that individuals
Act** 1006 snould nave f u11 ownership of the land when the president
thought them worthy of it; and (3) intoxicating liquors
must not be given or sold to Indians not citizens. The law was not
retroactive. Under it 8248 allotments in fee were made between 1906
and 1911, and the commissioner of Indian affairs reported that the
EDUCATION, LAND, AND CITIZENSHIP 691
tendency was for the Indians who got such lands to sell them, fre-
quently to spend the money aimlessly. In 1911 there were under
government supervision 122,780 unallotted Indians, 88,182 holding
trust patents, and 76,023 holding patents in fee, a total of 296,320
Indians under government supervision. In that year the total number
of Indians reported for the whole country, some of whom were not
under supervision, was 3 2 2,715 ; and of these 28,315 lived east of the
Mississippi.
Of late years the government has made extensive efforts to educate
the Indians. This policy was inaugurated in 1830, when $10,000 was
appropriated for this purpose. But for many years the amount
granted was small In 1870 it was only $100,000, but in 1911 it
was $3,757,495, which was expended on 39,800 pupils. For many
years money was given to mission schools, many of which were con-
ducted by Roman Catholics. This provoked controversy, with the
result that in 1896 it was ordered that no more money be appro-
priated to church schools. In recent years there is a growing opinion
that the large amount of money spent on the Indians has weakened
them in several important respects.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
On the history of the Far West see : Bancroft, History of Nevada, Colorado, and
Wyoming (1890) ; Ibid., History of Arizona and New Mexico (1889) ; Ibid., History
of Utah (1889) ; Ibid., History of Washington, Idaho, and Montana (1890) ; Joaquin
Miller, History of Montana (1874) ; Dimsdale, Vigilants of Montana (1866) ; Snook,
Colorado History and Government (1904), for schools; Sumner, Equal Suffrage in
Colorado (1900); Ladd, Story of New Mexico (1891), a valuable book; Raine,
Wyoming, a Story of the Outdoor West (1909) ; and Angel, edr., History of Nevada
(1881).
For early descriptions see : Bayard Taylor, Colorado, a Summer Trip (1867) ;
Bowles, Colorado, its Parks and Mountains (1869) ; Fosset, Colorado (1880) ; Rus-
ling, Across America (1784) ; and Hinton, Handbook to Arizona (1878).
On early life see : Dodge, Plains of the Great West (1877) ; Talbot, My People
of the Plains (1906); Inman and Cody, The Great Salt Lake Trail (1898);
Inman, The Old Santa Fe Trail (1898) ; Chittenden, edr., Life and Travels of Father
de Smet, 4 vols. (1905) ; Lummis, Land of Poco Tiempo (1893) ; Drannan, Thirty-one
Years on the Plains (1900) ; Porter, The West from the Census of 1880 (1882) ; Rae,
Westward by Rail (1874) ; Bowles, Our New West (1869) ; Bracket, Our Western
Empire (1882) ; McCoy, Cattle Trade of the West and Southwest (1874) ; Shinn,
Story of the Mine (1896) ; Ibid., Land Laws of Mining Districts (Johns Hopkins
Studies, 1884); and Reminiscences of Senator Stewart (1908); Wright (Don de
Quille, pseud.}, History of the Big Bonanza (1876).
On Indian wars see : Manypenny, Our Indian Wars (1880) ; Forsyth, Thrilling
Days of Army Life (1902); Barrett, edr., Geronimo's Story of his Life (1907);
Sheridan, Personal Memoirs, 2 vols. (1902) ; Miles, Personal Recollections and
Observations (1896) ; Custer, My Life on the Plains (1874) ; and Mrs. Custer, Tent-
ing on the Plains (1884). On recent phases of the Indian see : Jackson, A Century
of Dishonor (1885), overdrawn; Leupp, The Indian and his Problem (1910); and
Humphrey, The Indian Dispossessed (1906).
On Western economic conditions see : Coman, Economic Beginnings of the Far
West (1912) ; Newell, Irrigation in the United States (1906) ; Price, Irrigated Lands
692 THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FAR WEST
in the United States, Canada, and Mexico (1909) ; and Smythe, Conquest of Arid
America (1905).
On transcontinental railroads see: Davis, The Union Pacific Railway (1894);
Smalley, History of the Northern Pacific Railroad (1883) ; Raper, Railway Trans-
portation (191 2), based on Hadley's well-known book ; Adams, Railroads, their Origin
and Problems (1888) ; and Johnson, American Railway Transportation (1908).
For Independent Reading
Dodge, Plains of the Great West and their Inhabitants (1877) ; Lummis, Land of
Poco Tiempo (1893) > Warman, Story of the Railroad (1903) ; Custer, My Life on the
Plains (1874) ; Hayes, New Colorado and the Santa Fe Trail (1881) ; Lummis, Some
Strange Corners of our Country (1892) ; and Shinn, St-ory of the Mine (1896).
CHAPTER XXXIII
POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT, 1877-1881
HAYES AND HIS PARTY
WHEN President Hayes withdrew the troops from the South our
history entered a new phase. The conflict against slavery came to
a definite end and political and economic matters became
paramount. Theoretical discussion became less important p6^.
in congress and more time was given to propositions to conditions,
reform government and to promote industry. Political
leaders were now less conspicuous than formerly, parties became more
machine-like, and captains of politics directed them in much the same
spirit that captains of trade managed industry. The wide growth of
corporations brought concentrated capital into intimate relation with
lawmaking, it seemed to bring a lowering of morality of the law-
makers, and this brought an increased watchfulness by the people to
see that their rights were not sacrificed through the designs of heedless
industrial agents. The great reform movements since 1877 have been
connected with the civil service, the protection of industry, the regula-
tion of railways, and the restraints of trusts : they have all been phases
of a greater conflict in which the American democracy has been seeking
to establish its control over every force within its domain.
Rutherford B. Hayes, whose administration ushered in this era of
striving, was esteemed by his friends a good man who would do no
harm. He was quiet in deportment, reliable, religious,
truthful, serious, and straightforward. He was one of
those public men who are put forward to save the party
when probity must undo the mischief that recklessness has worked.
It was on this account he became governor of Ohio, and on this ac-
count he was called upon to redeem the folly of the politicians who
surrounded Grant. In office he found himself confronted by the same
graceless group. It was a surprise to them and to the country that
he refused to be a nonentity and tried to improve the situation before
him.
Hayes was a party man, but back of him were the independents.
They grew out of the liberal republican organization of 1872. De-
feated in that year, and without hope of setting the stand-
ards for democratic conduct, they remained a balance be-
tween the two other parties. William Cullen Bryant, Carl
Schurz, and George William Curtis made excellent leaders, and the
693
694 POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
large number of literary men in the group who aided them gave the
faction an influence beyond its voting strength. It had much sym-
pathy for Tilden because of his opposition to Tammany and the
New York canal ring, but looked at him askance in the presidential
contest because he would not openly declare for civil service reform.
Hayes supported that measure and had their approval in his long
fight against the spoilsmen in his own party. They opposed the
attempt to nominate Grant for a third term in 1880, and voted for
Garfield, who defeated Grant in the nominating convention. Four
years later they found a favored leader in Grover Cleveland, and were
the deciding factor in his election. He did not always please them,
but he retained their admiration until his retirement from public
service. The success of civil service reform took away their best
bond of life, but they reappeared in 1900 as a weakened force in oppo-
sition to the policy of expansion. The passing of the older leaders
has obscured the activity of the movement, but it survives in a
growing habit of independent voting.
In the make-up of the cabinet President Hayes paid due regard
to the conditions before him. He avoided the factional quarrel be-
t tween Conkling and Elaine and pleased New York by
making Evarts, of that state, secretary of state. Over the
treasury he placed John Sherman, of Ohio, who since 1859 had served
either on the house committee of ways and means or the senate
finance committee and was acquainted with the intimate history
of the finances from the beginning of the civil war. Sherman opposed
McCulloch's plans for redeeming the legal tenders but favored
the resumption law of 1875 and supported Hayes's sound money can-
vass in Ohio. This did not quite take away the nervousness of the
East at the appointment. It feared lest he should favor the payment
of bonds in greenbacks. On the other hand, it was an advantage to
have a secretary who understood the wishes of the West and had its
confidence.
The other members of the cabinet were George W. McCrary, of
Iowa, secretary of war ; Richard W. Thompson, of Indiana, secretary
of the navy; Charles Devens, of Massachusetts, attorney-general;
David M. Key, of Tennessee, postmaster-general ; and Carl Schurz, of
Missouri, secretary of the interior. Schurz was a liberal republican
in 1872, and Key was an ex-confederate soldier: their choice indi-
cated Hayes's spirit of conciliation.
It also indicated the president's purpose to act for himself. Much
to the disappointment of the party leaders he quickly took the Southern
question into his own hands. He conferred in Washing-
th*7South ton w^k Chamberlain and Hampton, the rival claimants
for the South Carolina governorship, and announced that
he would withdraw the troops from the Columbia statehouse. He
would not longer use them to protect one side in a state quarrel.
THE REPUBLICANS DIVIDED 695
Chamberlain must rely on his own resources. As the whites were all
for Hampton and his opponent dared not arm the negroes, the with-
drawal of the troops left the democrats in power. He dealt with
Louisiana in the same way. A commission he sent thither to investi-
gate reported that the republican claimant was kept in office only
by the use of troops : these were withdrawn, and Nicholls, the demo-
crat, took the power of governor supported by a democratic legisla-
ture. Chamberlain was soon among the discontented ones, but in
1901 he said : "If the canvass of 1876 had resulted in the success of
the republican party [in South Carolina] that party could not, for
want of materials, even when aided by the democratic minority, have
given a pure or competent administration." John Sherman expressed
Hayes's view in saying: "The president is not made the judge of
who is elected governor of a state, and an attempt to exercise such a
power would be a plain act of usurpation."
Hayes's action was supported by his cabinet and by liberal-minded
republicans ; but it disappointed the group of politicians who domi-
nated the party under Grant. Men like Morton, Simon
Cameron, and Zach Chandler, the political heirs of Thad " Half",,
Stevens and Benjamin Butler, were chagrined at the a™&di
abandonment of the Southern policy for which so much "stalwarts."
had been done. They expressed open contempt for the
president and the independents and dubbed them " half-breeds."
They themselves were called " stalwarts." The two names were freely
used for the next three years, and the rivalry between the factions
became bitter. The real bone of contention was power. "The men
who saved the union should govern it," said Blaine. He had raised
the Southern issue in 1876 and was disappointed at the quiet manner
in which the president now ignored it. But as time passed, and
public opinion came to Hayes, Blaine left the " stalwarts." He was
probably much influenced by the support which they received from
Conkling, his steady enemy.
COURSE OF THE DEMOCRATS
The democrats benefited by Hayes's Southern policy but loved
him none the more on account of it. To them he was a
usurper and a republican, and withdrawing the troops
was an act of necessity, not of grace. They attempted
two means of strengthening themselves before the country in antici-
pation of 1880.
The first was to investigate the election of 1876. The democratic
house appointed a committee for this purpose, the majority reporting
for Tilden and the minority for Hayes. The house could not unmake
a president, but it hoped to uncover facts which would convince the
country that Tilden was the victim of bad practices, and through
696 POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
this means to secure his election next time as a vindication. Their
hopes were defeated by the republican senate, whose committee on
privileges and elections investigated one of the many
i. Investi- charges that were made in reference to the election. In
Election of ^s case ^ was t^Lat democrats offered $8000 for an elec-
1876. toral vote in Oregon. By a subpoena the committee got
possession of 30,000 cipher telegrams sent by both parties
in the contest. Before they were returned to the telegraph company
the important republican dispatches were destroyed and copies were
made of certain democratic dispatches, which were soon afterwards pub-
lished in the New York Tribune. They contained corrupt propositions
to Tilden. He showed satisfactorily that he countenanced none of
them, that they were made unsought by him, and that they were not
communicated to him. The calmer portion of the people were
satisfied, but party prejudice was high, and the incident at least took
the edge off the plan for Tilden's vindication.
A more successful matter was the attempt to repeal the federal
election laws. By several enactments federal authority was extended
over elections, supervisors were appointed, federal judges
Elation*1 of and marshals took jurisdiction over cases concerning the
Laws. right to vote, and troops might be used to execute their
judgment. The system bore hard on the democrats in
the South and in New York, where a supervisor named Davenport
had arrested many persons, mostly democrats, because their naturali-
zation papers were said to be irregular. The courts decided against
Davenport, but he was not punished. The democrats could not re-
move him, since he was appointed by the president. They struck at
the system instead, aiming first at the use of troops. If this were
forbidden, the system would tbe crippled, since the federal court had
no constabulary to give quick effect to its decrees. They did not
control the senate and must do what they did in the house.
In 1877, in the last short session of Grant's administration, they
amended the army appropriation bill by forbidding the use of troops
fui at e^ecti°ns< The senate refused to concur, the house
Filibuster sto°d for its point, and the appropriation bill failed. In
the succeeding June the army was without pay, and
Hayes had to call an extra session in October to vote supplies. The
democrats waived their power for the time and allowed money to be
granted, but in the regular session, which came in December, they
returned to their position. The army, they said, could be used con-
stitutionally only "to execute the laws of the Union, to suppress
insurrection, and repel invasion"; and its use at elections was un-
constitutional and dangerous to liberty. They were unquestionably
in accord with the early spirit of the government. They had popular
support, and rather than again imperil the army appropriation bill
the senate gave way. June 18, 1878, it was enacted that troops be
DEMAND FOR INFLATION 697
no longer used in elections. This success was in keeping with the
president's liberal treatment of the South. It left that section still
freer to manage its own affairs. It was, also, a step in check of cen-
tralization.
In 1878 the democrats elected all but four of the 106 Southern
representatives, and the senate contained thirty men formerly con-
nected with the confederacy. In this respect they profited
by the recent removal of disability imposed on ex-con-
federates. The party controlled the senate by eight votes
and had 148 in the house to 130 republicans and 15 greenbackers.
They felt able to demand the repeal of the last features of the federal
election laws. They again resorted to " riders," placing them on the
appropriation bills to forbid the use of funds paying election super-
visors or marshals who were concerned in elections. Hayes vetoed
the bills, and the houses could not pass them over his veto. They
then passed a bill repealing the election laws outright. It was vetoed,
and congress could not carry it over the veto. The democrats hoped
the people would approve their position in 1880, but other forces
were in play which were to take the election of that year out of their
hands.
, THE BLAND-ALLISON SILVER COINAGE LAW
While the republicans quarreled with Hayes over his Southern
policy and received the democratic onslaught on the federal election
laws, the country experienced the first of several waves of
agitation for the free coinage of silver. The movement creditors'
was connected with the hard times of the years after the
panic of 1873, during which the prices of both grain and cotton fell
to points lower than were known since the war. The West had bor-
rowed money to develop its farming resources and the South to repair
the waste of war. Both sections were against lenders in the East
and opposed the redemption of the legal tenders. Accustomed to the
chaotic Western and Southwestern ante-bellum bank notes and the
depreciated war currency they now found a perfectly satisfactory
money in the greenbacks, only slightly below par. They thought
business would improve if there were more, and not less, of them.
This feeling was strong in both parties in the West and South.
Moderate inflationists remained in the old parties, but extreme
men in 1875 began to secede, denouncing both organizations as being
bound to the bondholders. They openly advocated fiat
money; and in a national convention at Indianapolis in
1876 they nominated Peter Cooper of New York for presi- party>
dent, declared for the repeal of the resumption act of 1875,
demanded the issue of legal tender notes bearing interest at 3.65
per cent in which the maturing bonds should be paid, and pronounced
the sale of gold bonds to foreigners an enslavement of the people to
698 POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
alien taskmasters. They also protested against selling bonds for
silver for fractional currency as an action beneficial to the owners of
silver mines but burdensome to the people. This allusion to the
mine owners derives peculiar interest from the subsequent con-
nection of that class with the free silver movement. The green-
back party cast 81,737 votes in 1876, and of these 53,503 came
from Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Kansas. In this elec-
tion they chose no member of congress.
The theories of the greenbackers were too extreme, and although
they had a popular vote of 308,578 in 1880, the movement was never
formidable. Its greatest impression was made in the con-
Decline, gressional elections of 1878 when it cast a million votes
and elected 15 members of the house. In 1884 it gave
173,370 votes for Benjamin F. Butler, their candidate for president.
The moderate inflationists were far more numerous. They rejected
fiat money and sought to increase the volume of the currency through
free coinage of silver.
The silver movement has had three periods of agitation, one in the
Bland- Allison bill of 1878, another in the Sherman silver law of 1890,
and still another in the Bryan campaign of 1896. The
Origin £rs£ arose m the following manner :
Coinage. A law of 1837 provided for the free and unlimited coin-
age of silver dollars containing 41 1\ grains of standard
silver. For many years thereafter very little silver was mined in the
country, and from 1789 to 1873 barely $8,000,000 was coined. At the
latter date the bullion in a dollar was worth 102 cents, and none was
offered for coinage. Probably for this reason in revising the coinage
laws in an act of 1873 congress said nothing about coining standard
silver dollars, although a trade dollar of heavier weight was ordered
for use in the Orient. This aroused no interest at the time, and many
congressmen asserted afterwards that it was done without their
knowledge. But it was known to others, and there was no justifica-
tion for those who later called it "the crime of 1873." ^n the same
year Germany adopted the gold standard and began to sell her silver
coins as bullion. In the same year, also, very rich silver mines were
opened in Nevada. The price of silver began to fall. In 1874 the
bullion in a dollar was for the first time in thirty years worth less
than a hundred cents. The mine owners were disappointed when
they learned of the recent legislation, pronounced it dark and sinister,
and asked for remonetization. Their demand fitted in with the
general Western desire for more money. From then until the collapse
of the free silver movement they were important but designedly in-
conspicuous partners in the agitation.
Free coinage was popular in both parties in the South and West.
It manifested itself in several bills in congress early in 1876. None
of them passed, but the popularity of the cause impressed itself on
GOLD AT PAR 699
the representatives in the elections of that year, and it had a strong
hold on the new congress. It found, in the house, also, a persistent
and capable leader in Richard P. Bland, a democrat from
Missouri. His earnest fight for silver won him the nick- pagsed
name of "Silver Dollar Dick." In the extra session of
October, 1877, he introduced the "Bland Bill," proposing the free
and unlimited coinage of silver dollars weighing 41 2\ grains, at the
ratio with gold of 15.62 to i, silver bullion then selling at 90. Under
the rule of the previous question the bill was forced through the house
without debate by a vote of 164 to 34. The democrats supported it
as a party measure, and Western republicans dared not oppose it.
The republican senate feared to reject it outright, and offered a com-
promise which the house accepted thinking that it was the best
they could do for silver. It was proposed by Allison, of Iowa, and
omitted free and unlimited coinage, but ordered the secretary of the
treasury to buy each month for coinage into silver dollars, exclusive
of coinage already issued, from two to four million dollars of silver,
provided the amount invested in silver at one time be not more than
$5,000,000. Bland yielded reluctantly, and gave notice he would
continue the battle for free silver. If he could not get it, he said,
he would favor issuing "paper money enough to stuff down the bond-
holders until they are sick." The act passed in 1878. Before Bland
could renew the fight, revived prosperity withered his hopes, and his
plan was laid away until a more favorable time.
RESUMPTION OF SPECIE PAYMENT
The act of 1875 to authorize resumption was passed by a group of
repudiated representatives who had nothing to hope and nothing to
fear from their constituents. It has been called a "death-
bed repentance of the republican party. " It was, in fact,
better than existing political conditions warranted. The
democrats denounced the law and carried a bill through
the house to repeal it. But the senate blocked the attempt, and Sec-
retary Sherman proceeded with his plans for resumption. Through-
out a part of 1877 and all of 1878 he gradually sold bonds for gold
until he had on hand $114,000,000 of the precious stuff, $95,500,000
of which came from bond sales. Meantime, the price of gold fell,
and December 17, 1878, it was at par for the first time since 1861.
The large banks aided the operation by abandoning "gold deposits."
By getting the sub-treasury admitted to the New York clearing house
Secretary Sherman was able to settle balances without the use of
large quantities of gold. All this strengthened public confidence,
and resumption was actually accomplished on New Year's day with-
out the slightest difficulty.
700 POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
To the general public the affair was eminently successful, but
experienced observers saw that grave danger was still ahead. Could
Can it be resumption be maintained ? The year opened with busi-
Maiirtained? ness exceedingly bad. Immense foreign wheat crops had
put the price so low that the large American crop of 1878
was marketed at ruinous prices. The market for cotton, iron, and
nearly every other product was depressed. The low price of wheat
in Europe made it seem certain that we should send little abroad
throughout the winter and spring. Low prices abroad gave a check
to business, and it was to be expected that some of the many American
bonds recently bought there would be resold on this side. With
light exports ruling we should likely have to send gold abroad to pay
the balance of trade, and with this extra demand the stock of the
precious coin in the channels of trade would be so depleted that in-
roads must surely be made on the government's hoard. To get this
gold was easy enough : the country was full of legal tenders which
must now be cashed as presented. Of course, no one would send
these notes abroad in settlement of accounts. The secretary of the
treasury knew this situation thoroughly, and week after week watched
it with great anxiety. The spring passed safely, but in the second
week in June, $1,250,000, taken directly from the treasury vaults,
was sent abroad. Was it the beginning of the long-expected disaster ?
Three months must pass before exports would again be large, and if
during this period the same amount went out weekly, further bond
sales alone could preserve resumption.
From this threatening situation we were saved by the luckiest
possible event. A backward spring reduced the British
Failure cr°P ProsPects> wheat rose in price, and foreigners began
in Europe. to can< f°r tne large surplus we had carried over from the
preceding harvest. The balance of trade turned in our
favor, exchange fell, and our gold remained with us.
But this was not the whole story. Cold rains continued in the
British Isles during the summer, blight appeared, and crops yielded
less than half the usual quantity. On the continent
Year°ofier smiilar Dut less distressful conditions lowered production to
Prosperity, eighty-five per cent of that of normal years. While famine
conditions thus threatened in Europe, America had un-
usually fine weather, an acreage in wheat 500,000 acres larger than in
1878, and a total harvest exceeding that of any preceding year. As
Americans saw this vast supply coming to maturity they gave them-
selves up to the gloomiest thoughts. The first intimations of con-
ditions abroad did not reassure them, for they felt their own surplus
would more than overcome Europe's shortage. But the realization of
the foreign calamity drove away their dismay. Prices rose forty
cents a bushel in six weeks, and in September three and a half times as
much wheat went to Europe as in the same month, 1878. This year
GOOD TIMES AND POLITICS 701
foreign production generally was bad, and Indian corn and American
meat were also called for to a larger extent than before. As though
Providence would give equal benefits to all parts of the country, there
was this year a failure in the cotton crop of India, and American
cotton rose in consequence. The completion of a pipe line from the
Pennsylvania oil wells to the coast in the same year brought an increase
of 2,000,000 barrels in petroleum exports. Far less of stimulus than
that which came from these several fields of activity would have
placed business generally in excellent condition. As it was, 1879
was a wonder year in our industrial history.
With hard times went political discontent. Inflation was no
longer popular in the West and South, and specie payment was secure.
Secretary Sherman saw his gold reserve grow from
$120,000,000 at the end of June to $157,000,000 at the
end of October. There was so much gold in the hands of
our business men that they began to take it to the treasury to ex-
change it for legal tender notes, which were more convenient in hand-
ling. Moreover, the years 1880 and 1881 brought a continuation of
prosperity. Europe still suffered from poor crops, while we had
quantities of food to spare. It was not until 1883 that our fat years
again gave place to lean ones.
THE ELECTION or 1880
The return of prosperity made republican success in 1880 a prob-
ability, and each faction undertook to control the nomination. The
stalwarts were determined to avoid a man like Hayes,
the reformer. They had among themselves no one half
so likely to be chosen as Grant, whom some of the leaders Term.
began to urge for a third term more than a year before the
convention met. Under him the good old days would undoubtedly
return, and a politician might call his soul his own. Grant was then
leisurely traveling around the world, received with distinction in
three continents, and the Americans saw in this a reflection of national
honor which heightened their esteem for the hero. The movement
to nominate him was skillfully managed by Conkling, General Logan,
and T. Don. Cameron. Grant himself was pleased at the prospect of
anotner term, and timed his arrival in America with reference to the
plans of his friends. He landed at San Francisco, September 20,
1879, when most active preparations were being made for the coming
nominations. After the splendid reception which a grateful people
tendered him, he made a trip to Mexico and the countries south of it,
procedure both dignified and prudent.
His opponents were not able to unite on one man. The reformers
looked to Edmunds, of Vermont. John Sherman had strong support
in the West and Elaine had a following among those Eastern
702 POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
men who did not favor Grant, while other candidates had small
followings. Elaine was the ablest of them all, but he was objec-
tionable to the reformers because he was suspected of par-
ticipation in the scandals under Grant, and his breach with
Conkling was an additional embarrassment. However,
they all opposed Grant bitterly, and were prepared to give up much
to keep out of power the men who sought his election.
The first test of their strength in the convention (Chicago, June 2,
1880) came when Conkling moved to apply the unit rule to state
delegations. To adopt it would give the large states to Grant and,
as it came out, that would have meant his nomination. The motion
was lost ; and on the first ballot Conkling's man got only 304 votes
and after that no more than 313 of the 379 necessary to a nomina-
tion. Ballot after ballot showed little change, until on the thirty-
sixth James A. Garfield, of Ohio, was nominated by a union of the
Sherman and Elaine forces. In the interest of harmony Conkling
was allowed to name the candidate for vice-president. He declared
for Chester A. Arthur, whom Hayes removed from the New York
customhouse when he decided to reform it. One who knew him well
exclaimed, when he heard later of Arthur's elevation: "'Chet'
Arthur President of the United States ! Good God !" The nomina-
tion was bad in itself, but the third term movement was defeated,
and that was the main point. Garfield was respected as an able and
high-minded man, and the people were disposed to forgive the unfit
vice-president on the ground that it was necessary to conciliate the
stalwarts.
The democrats were at sea. Tilden was not available because of
a certain suspicion that he did not quite clear his name from sus-
picion in connection with the former election, because
he had the avowed opposition of Kelly, the leader of
Tammany, and because he had recently experienced a
physical collapse which rendered it improbable that he could fulfill the
duties of president if elected. Several smaller men were spoken of,
but none seemed so promising as General W. S. Hancock, a brave and
handsome soldier, but as inexperienced in politics as Grant before
1868. He was nominated with W. H. English, of Indiana, for vice-
president. The greenbackers nominated James B. Weaver, of Iowa,
and the prohibitionists Neal Dow, of Maine.
The campaign was full of personalities. Garfield was charged
with participation in the Credit Mobilier scandal but showed that
the charge was unjust. Other moral obliquities were
alleged against one candidate or the other. The demo-
crats were arraigned for their policy of intimidation in the
South. Probably the prosperity of the country was the most im-
portant argument on either side. It made for the republicans, who
had 214 electoral votes to 155 for their opponents. A plurality of
HAYES'S POSITION 703
less than 10,000 in the popular vote showed that the election was
really very close. The republicans also carried the house of repre-
sentatives, where they had 150 members to 131 democrats and 12
greenbackers. In the senate they had 37, the democrats a like num-
ber, and the balance was held by two independents, Davis, of Illi-
nois, and Mahone, of Virginia.
In the election of 1880 Hayes took no part. He was out of step
with his party, and awaited retirement with a quiet dignity which
brought him much sympathy. His successor would have
a better party following, but it was pleasant to reflect that
he would not abandon the reforms for which Hayes steadily currents,
contended. The administration just closing was, in fact,
an important period in which politics shifted from an old to a new
basis. It marked the end of reconstruction and the beginning of an
era in which the people showed a determination to control their own
rulers, to eliminate abuse, and to make democracy a greater reality.
Had he been a more practical statesman the break with the past
could not have been so sharp, and the keynote of the future would
not have been so clearly sounded.
President Hayes gained much from the admirable bearing of his
wife, who illustrated the highest qualities of American womanhood.
Grant's free and easy ways introduced into the White Mfg Ha eg
House something of the atmosphere of the camp. Mrs.
Hayes's sense of purity and simple comfort made it as clean as a New
England manse. She considered it her home rather than an official
residence. The politicians in Washington were aghast when she
decided not to serve wine at the president's table. Secretary Evarts
refused to attend, and the usual diplomatic dinners were suspended.
The Temperance Women of America showed their admiration by
placing her portrait in the executive mansion, and fair public opinion
admired the manner in which she asserted her position in her own
family.
GARFIELD'S SHORT PRESIDENCY
The announcement of a cabinet brought trouble, chiefly of Conk-
ling's making. Elaine, of Maine, was secretary of state, William
Windom, of Minnesota, secretary of the treasury, Robert .
T. Lincoln, of Illinois, secretary of war, William H. Hunt, 1
of Louisiana, secretary of the navy, Wayne MacVeagh, of Pennsyl-
vania, attorney-general, Thomas L. James, of New York, postmaster-
general, and Samuel J. Kirkwood, of Iowa, secretary of the interior.
Conkling resented Elaine's prominence in the group, fearing his
influence with Garfield was paramount, and considering the low rank
of New York in the cabinet a token that his own influence was neu-
tralized by his rival. He was slightly appeased when his supporter,
704 POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
Levi P. Morton, was made minister to France, but this was overcome
by the news that Robertson, an anti-Conkling man, was to be head of
the New York customhouse. He now became an avowed
Resignation opponent of tne administration and published a letter
of Conklmg. f^ . . „, ., . . . . i j j
showing that Garfield, whose inaugural address gave sup-
port to civil service reform, had in the preceding campaign coun-
tenanced campaign contributions from officeholders. He then took
his quarrel to the senate, where the democrats and the republicans
had equal numbers, with two independents who refused to vote on
party matters. Two months passed in vain attempts to organize the
body, when a truce was made to allow the confirmation of the presi-
dent's nominations. Conkling was thought to have planned to have
the senate adjourn as soon as his own friends were confirmed; and
Garfield tried to block this by sending in first the nomination of
Robertson. Its approval was the occasion of a great battle, in which
the New York senator was defeated. Seeing failure before him,
Conkling and his colleague, T. C. Platt, resigned their seats, hoping
for an immediate reelection by the New York legislature. They lost
their calculation. The legislature, tired of the strife, sent other men
to Washington. Platt was a young man and eventually recovered his
feet. Three years later he was at peace with Elaine ; Conkling retired
to private life. He had great mental and practical ability, but he
was arrogant, intolerant, and uncompromising. Had he remained in
the senate he would have made life uncomfortable for the president
and the secretary of state.
Garfield yielded enough to the demand for reform to appoint as
postmaster-general, James, who had applied the merit system in the
New York post office. James soon began to investigate
Star Route ^ contracts to carry the mail over the "star routes," as
Frauds. certain routes in parts of the West were called in the
department. It appeared that Brady, second assistant
postmaster-general under Hayes, and Senator Dorsey, of Arkansas,
had conspired with mail contractors of this class to defraud the gov-
ernment through extravagant prices or the multiplication of useless
services. Indictments were secured, and the trials became one of the
great events of the year. The defendants were actively aided by
many of the leading "machine" politicians of the republican party.
Brady at last threatened to produce evidence against Garfield if
the prosecution was not dropped. No relief coming, he published a
letter from Garfield to "My dear Hubbell," chairman of the repub-
lican congressional campaign committee in 1880, condoning the habit
of levying contributions for campaign purposes on the salaries of
government employees. As this was one of the worst abuses of the
spoils system, it discredited Garfield's open protestations of friend-
ship for reform. The proof of fraud in the star-route cases seems over-
whelming, but the important defendants managed to wriggle through
PRESIDENT ARTHUR 705
the clutches of the law. Public disgust was great, and the opinion
was strengthened that the country needed a reformer.
Before this feeling went far the president, on July 2, 1881, was shot
down in a Washington railway station. The assassin, Charles J.
Guiteau, a disappointed office seeker, cried out that he was
a " stalwart" and that Arthur would now be president.
He was executed for the crime, but his mind was probably
unbalanced by the bitterness of party strife in which he steeped it.
The victim of his madness lingered through the summer between life
and death, and died September 19. His fortitude and gentleness in
suffering won all hearts, and in the shadow of the national sorrow
political asperities softened. So sober a paper as the Nation showed
the change in sentiment. In May it pronounced the letter to Hubbell
"a painful surprise" ; in September it said of the deceased, "He will
always remain one of the saints of American story, without a spot on
the whiteness of his garments."
When Arthur became president the Conkling quarrel was still in
an active condition. He showed his interest in it by going to Albany
in May to secure his patron's reelection to the United
States senate. It was considered an unworthy thing for
a vice-president to stoop to such work, and the prospect
of Arthur's elevation alarmed many people. But the shock of the
tragedy deeply impressed the vice-president. He dropped the role
of the politician and revealed unsuspected dignity and good sense.
Through the same sobering agency the people were prepared to accord
him a fair trial in the high office he now assumed. At the end of
three years he retired with the respect of the nation and the esteem
of his party.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For general works see : Sparks, National Development (1907) ; Andrews, The
United States in our Own Time (1903) ; Wilson, History of the American People, 5
vols. (1902); The Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VII (1903); Stahwood,
History of the Presidency (1808) ; and Woodburn, American Political History, 1776-
1876 (1906), republishes articles by Alexander Johnston in Lalor, Cyclopedia of
Political Science, still useful since some of the phases of previous history are carried
over into Hayes's administration.
The important sources are: Congressional Record, for debates in congress;
McPherson, Hand-Book of Politics (1878, 1880, and 1882), contains votes in con-
gress; Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 10 vols. (1896-1899);
MacDonald, Select Statutes (1903); Appleton's Annual Cyclopedia, new series;
and the various almanacs, as the World1 s Almanac, and the American Almanac.
The legislative reports for the period are abundant, for which see Poore, Descriptive
Catalogue of Government Publications to 1881 and the Annotated Index to the Public
Documents (1902).
For biographies and works of leading men see : Keeler, Rutherford B. Hayes
(1910) ; Gilmore, Life of Garfield (1880), the best of the campaign lives; Bigelow,
Life of Tilden, 2 vols. (1896) ; Ibid., ed., Letters of Tilden, 2 vols. (1908) ; Boutwell,
Reminiscences of Sixty Years (1902); Hoar, Autobiography, 2 vols. (1903); Andrew
D. White, Autobiography, 2 vols. (1905) ; Hamilton [Dodge], Life of James G.
22
7o6 POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL READJUSTMENT
Elaine (1895) ; Stanwood, James G. Elaine (1906) ; Sherman, Recollections of Forty
Years, 2 vols. (1897) ; The Sherman Letters (ed. 1894) ; Burton, John Sherman
(1906) ; Mayes, Lucius Q. C. Lamar (1896) ; Hinsdale, Works of James A. Garfield
(1882); Ibid., President Garfield and Education (1882); Balch, Life of Garfield
(1881), uncritical; Conkling, Life and Letters of Roscoe Conkling (1889); Ogden,
Life and Letters of E. L. Godkin, 2 vols. (1907) ; Wilson, Life of C. A. Dana (1907) ;
Autobiography of T. C. Platt (1910); Coolidge, Orville H. Platt (1910); Gary,
George W. Curtis (1900) ; and Bancroft and Dunning, Carl Schurz's Public Career,
(in Schurz, Reminiscences, vol. Ill, 1909).
For Independent Reading
Sparks, National Development (1907) ; Elaine, Twenty Years of Congress, 2 vols.
(1884-1886) ; Hoar, Autobiography, 2 vols. (1903) ; Andrew D. White, Autobi-
ography, 2 vols. (1905) ; and Burton, John Sherman (1906).
CHAPTER XXXIV
POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM, 1881-1893
CIVIL SERVICE REFORM
THE most glaring political abuse of the day was the spoils system.
Scandals occasionally appeared in the higher offices, but in the vast
army of clerks and postmasters office was a reward for
electioneering, and officeholders paid campaign contribu- ^Jj^n of
tions for fear of losing their appointments. As a result service,
the service was filled with inefficient clerks, and the appeal
to the voters was on the lowest level. The type of politician whom this
system developed was apt to be defiant of public opinion. It was felt
that the beginning of reform was the adoption of some sort of merit
system in appointments. American sentiment was influenced by the
progress of a similar movement in England, where in 1853 Charles E.
Trevelyan and Sir Stafford H. Northcote reported a plan for reform-
ing the civil service. They recommended a system of competitive
examinations, but for some years various things united to prevent its
adoption.
One of the Americans most in touch with British affairs was Charles
Sumner. He was interested in the work of Trevelyan and Northcote,
and in 1864 introduced a bill in the senate to apply com-
petitive principles to appointments in America. The bill
attracted much attention, but reconstruction soon en-
gaged Sumner's attention, and he did not press the matter. It was
taken up by Thomas Jenckes, a representative from Rhode Island.
His first bill was lost, 1865 ; but he got a committee created to investi-
gate the situation, and himself became the chairman. Its report,
May 25, 1868, described the systems in force in England, France,
Prussia, and China and contained a bill creating a competitive system.
Congress paid no heed and Jenckes turned to the people, where he
found supporters, prominent among them being Carl Schurz, William
Cullen Bryant, and George William Curtis. Grant himself, a candi-
date for the presidency, declared for the reform. He redeemed his
promise in his second annual message, and several bills were intro-
duced, none of which could pass. The spoils system was too inti-
mately grafted on the political life of the day to be abandoned by
congress until a vast amount of public opinion was created on the
subject.
707
708 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
The reformers were persistent, and late in the session, 1871, were
able to attach a " rider" to the appropriation bill in which congress
established what is known as the first civil service com-
rnission3111' missi°n- It authorized the president to prescribe rules
mission, ^ admission to the civil service and to appoint a com-
mission to inquire into the fitness of applicants; and it
gave $25,000 for the expenses of the same. The commission was
named at once, with Curtis for chairman. It formulated rules for
appointments, which Grant adopted and promulgated, April, 1872,
for use in the departments in Washington and the federal offices in
New York. Trouble now began. Individual congressmen urged the
president to appoint their friends. In some cases he made bad selec-
tions, which disgusted the reformers, and finally Curtis resigned in
despair. Grant had little patience with the situation ; he gradually
yielded to the arguments of practical advisers who declared reform
an impossible dream, and when congress in 1873 refused to renew
the appropriation he ceased to enforce the rules of 1872. The com-
mission continued a formal existence with Dorman B. Eaton as
chairman.
Hayes would have revived the energy of the commission if congress
had given the necessary money, for the law of 1871 was unrepealed.
As it was, he tried to reform the New York customhouse.
Hayes O] ^- committee appointed by him reported that one-fifth
of the clerks there should be dismissed as unnecessary.
Hayes followed the suggestion, removing the collector, Chester A.
Arthur, a favorite of Conkling, because Arthur would not indorse
the reforms. He also applied the merit system to the New York
post office, placing at the head of it Thomas L. James, a reformer.
Senator Conkling resented this policy. He thought the reform
movement contained a great deal of cant, and once expressed his
contempt in the following words uttered with a withering drawl,
"When Doctor-r-r Ja-a-awson said that patr-r-riotism was the 1-a-w-s-t
r-r-refuge of a scoundr-r-rel, he ignor-r-red the enor-r-rmous possi-
bilities of the word r-refa-awr-r-rm !" The house of representatives
in something of the same spirit made Benjamin F. Butler chairman
of its committee on civil service reform. Hayes realized the utter
opposition of congress and dared not attempt to reform the depart-
ments, as he might have done under the law of 1871.
Meanwhile, the movement progressed outside of congress. Associa-
tions to promote it were formed in many cities, and in 1881 a national
civil service league was organized. A mass of literature
a'mTArthur's aPPeare(^ m support of the movement, and among its
Attitudes. defenders were leading men of thought. Garfield when
candidate for the presidency gave open allegiance, and
his election gave hope to the reformers. The accession of Arthur,
Conkling's friend, and victim of Hayes's New York reforms, filled
THE REFORMS WIN 709
them with dread. They breathed easily when in his first annual
message he discussed competitive examinations mildly, pointed out
some defects, but said that he would execute such a plan fairly
if congress adopted it. No law followed at that session, but
when the elections of 1882 went against the republicans, they were
willing to pass one. The fact that Garfield's assassin was a dis-
appointed office seeker was an added motive for adopting the merit
system.
The "Pendleton Act," 1883, took its name from George H. Pen-
die ton, chairman of the senate committee on civil service reform,
but it was written by Dorman B. Eaton. It created a
classified service, to be organized by the president and to
apply to clerks in the departments and in post offices
and custom houses having over fifty employees. Examinations in
keeping with the requirement should be given, and they were to de-
termine appointments, and applicants should bring no other recom-
mendation than as to residence and moral character. They were to
be taken as nearly as possible from the states in proportion to popula-
tion. The president might by his order include within the classified
service employees not originally included, and strict measures were
taken to abolish campaign contributions by employees. The presi-
dent was to appoint a commission of three members to supervise the
examinations, keep records, recommend clerks on the approved
lists, investigate alleged violations of the law, and report annually
to the president and congress.
Arthur, true to his promise, executed the law faithfully and placed
Eaton at the head of the commission. In 1884 both parties indorsed
it; and although its enforcement has sometimes been
evaded, its expediency has generally been granted. Sue- Execution
cessive presidents have extended its scope. Cleveland's JJ^J, ^
party came into power with an office-hunger created in a Cleveland,
long period of exclusion, and he had much .trouble to
keep them from overturning the system. But he respected the clas-
sified service, and satisfied his supporters out of the unclassified offices.
The reformers complained that he did not keep the spirit of the reform.
Some of his appointments were undoubtedly bad, which brought
other complaints. But Cleveland personally favored the law, and
just before he went out of office brought the railway mail clerks
under the civil service rules.
The republicans, returning to power in 1889, were greatly incensed
at the railway mail order. It was, they said, a trick to give immunity
to recently appointed democrats. Harrison suspended
the operations of the order, made many removals, and garrison,
when it was at last operative, few railway clerks were
democrats. Cleveland resisted the party pressure for removals as
much as he could. In his entire term 20,000 occurred : under Harrison
710 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
there were 35,850 dismissals within a little more than a year after
his inauguration. Clarkson, controlling appointments in the post-
office department, was so active that he was called "the headman."
But Harrison enforced the rules within the classified service and
brought within the rules a part of the Indian service, hitherto liable
to peculiarly bad appointments. He did the same for the fish commis-
sion and the clerks of free-delivery post offices ; but none of these
steps were taken until the offices affected were generally filled by
republicans.
Harrison appointed Theodore Roosevelt, of New York, to the
civil service commission, and afterwards made him its chairman.
This vigorous young reformer wished at first to be assist-
- ant secretary °f state, but Secretary Elaine desired a
missioner. milder spirited man for an assistant. Until then the com-
mission had sought to obtain its objects without antago-
nizing congressmen. Membership on it was so inconspicuous that
Roosevelt's friends advised him not to accept. He disregarded the
advice and gave the civil service commission a new kind of force.
There was no more hesitation in its actions: whoever criticized it
was met by a rejoinder which took away his argument. Foolish
assertions that the examinations were fantastical, that appointments
went by favoritism, and that the commission was nerveless, were
dispelled. Once when the press said that it was well known that only
republicans could get office, Roosevelt took a striking means of
refuting the charge. He called before him the Washington corres-
pondents of the Southern newspapers, told them the South had not
its full share of clerks, and asked them to induce more Southerners
to take the examinations. He told them to say in their papers that
politics would play no part in the appointments. The result was a
large increase in appointments from the section indicated, and most
of them went to democrats. The discomfited politicians ceased to
call the civil service commission a nonentity.
Roosevelt's activity piqued congress, and in the committee-of-
the-whole, where the yeas and nays were not taken, it cut down the
appropriation for the commission. When the bill came
UP ^or ^na^ acti°n> wnere the voters must go on record,
gressmen. tne discontented ones would refuse to vote, and the appro-
priation would be restored. This happened several times.
Once the opposition cut down the appropriation for examinations.
Roosevelt omitted to hold them in the districts of the members
who thought them unnecessary, much to the dissatisfaction of the
constituencies concerned. He thus appealed to the people over the
head of the representatives. As a result, he was little loved but
much feared by the spoilsmen, but the people trusted him and admired
his fearlessness.
Cleveland was not popular with his party in his second term, and
RECENT EXTENSIONS 711
could ignore the democratic spoilsmen. Some of his appointments
were made without due investigation, and he made others
to force the repeal of the Sherman silver law; but he Cleveland's
widely extended the classified service, adding 29,399 places Term!
by one order. His successor, President McKinley, had
trouble to keep congress from revoking all such orders. Delay and
reflection was secured by creating a senate committee appointed to
investigate the subject. After a while it reported that the classified
service should be reduced. It looked gloomy for the
advocates of reform, but at just this moment war with
Spain intervened and drew away the attention of the
spoilsmen. The war created many new places, and this served
partly to divert the attack on the classified service. The subject
was taken up again in 1899, when the president removed 3693 places
from the classified service and transferred 6414 from the oversight of
the commission to that of the secretary of war. It was a questionable
step, though defended on the ground that the places involved had to
do with expert service or with confidential clerkships, and that in
such cases competitive examinations ought not to apply. The
reformers replied that even if this was true in principle, the number
of positions involved in this instance was far too large. Since 1899
the classified service has been several times extended, last of all by
President Taft, but the traces of the spoils system have not been
removed from our public life. The agitation for national reform
stimulated action in some states, notably New York, Massachusetts,
Illinois, Wisconsin, Indiana, Louisiana, and Connecticut, where the
reform system was wholly or partially adopted.
BALLOT REFORM
Closely connected with civil service reform was the fight for better
laws, which depended on state rather than federal action. The
old ballot system was weak in that it was not secret, that
the ballots were privately printed and capable of various J0")?^
f . . , • Conditions.
forms of juggling for party interests, and that they were
printed on various small slips confusing to the voter, and by this
means profitable to the party tricksters. Abuses under this condi-
tion had existed from early times, but it was only the new reform
spirit that resented and sought to remedy them. This was made
easier by the rapid growth of the evil practices in the early eighties.
The increasing prominence of the tariff in elections is supposed to
have brought forth large campaign funds which might be used cor-
ruptly. It also went with an open manifestation of the manufacturer's
desire to control the vote of his operatives. Agents of -employers
were known to hand ballots to employees and see them safely deposited
in the boxes. Black-lists were sometimes kept by which refractory
712 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
voters were dropped from the factory pay rolls. In the agitation of
the day the amount of such an evil would naturally be exaggerated,
but it cannot be doubted that it existed extensively.
Bribery also flourished. Both parties used it, and conservative
people could see no way of abolishing it outright, while less sensitive
people only smiled at it. There existed a purchasable
vote which was as willing to sell itself as the purchaser
was willing to buy. This abuse was most glaring in the election of
1888, and soon afterwards arose the movement for reform. It
demanded the "Australian Ballot," the chief features of which were
that the ballot be secret and officially printed in " blanket " form. The
system originated in Australia, but it had been adopted in England.
The movement in the United States had rapid success. The first
step forward was when the New York legislature, 1888, passed a
law of the desired kind, but the veto of Governor Hill robbed the
state of the honor of leading in the reform. This distinction went
to Massachusetts instead, which in the same year passed such a law
and put it into operation in her election of 1889. The ice was now
broken, and nine states followed in 1889, seven in 1890, and eighteen
in 1891. Five of these laws were pronounced "poor" or "bad"
by the reformers. They were later amended, and in 1909 thirty-nine
of the forty-six states had blanket ballots, and of the others only
four — Connecticut, North and South Carolina, and Georgia — used
unofficial ballots. In the last three the voting is entirely public.
TARIFF REFORM
Most of the political reformers were also tariff reformers. The
inequalities they saw in protection appealed to them in nearly the
same way as the political evils. On the other hand,
KindTof not a11 tari^ ref°rmers were political reformers. The large
Reformers, majority who favored a lower tariff acted from economic
reasons, or because party loyalty demanded it. Among
tariff reformers were at least two classes, those who would readjust
the schedules slightly and conformably with the revenue needs of gov-
ernment, and those who were theoretical free-traders. Many of the
political reformers belonged to this second class of tariff reformers.
Numerous new industries sprang up during the war, and under
protection some made large, and others small, profits. The first
class did not want the tariff reduction, and the second
Tw° Sides could not afford it. The mass of consumers, when they
Tariff. gave tne matter serious thought, felt they were paying
to support a system artificial in itself and badly adapted
to revenue purposes. But it yielded large sums to the treasury, and
these were needed to pay the war debt and aid in reestablishing the
public credit after the war. .
CONTINUING THE WAR TARIFF 713
Existing taxes were of four kinds; internal revenue taxes, an
income tax, duties on articles not produced in considerable quantities
in the United States, and duties on articles largely produced
here. Taken together, they were a burden, and it was
inevitable that they should be lowered. The plan of reduction
favored by the protectionists was to give relief from high taxes by
lowering the internal revenue and the income tax. This went on so
rapidly that by 1870 the former taxes were taken off nearly everything
but liquor and tobacco, and public opinion insisted that these be
taxed in the interest of good morals. At the same time it was arranged
that the tax on incomes should disappear with the year 1871. Forced
to give up something else, the protectionists now agreed that the duties
should be lowered on the second class, as coffee, tea, and sugar ; and
in this they were usually successful. The reformers pointed out that
by throwing the burden of the revenue on the protected schedules
congress was fixing protection in our system, but the people were
pleased to have any visible relaxation, and accepted free coffee and
tea thankfully. This process was gradual, and was embodied in
four tariff bills, as follows:
i. In 1867 the house of representatives passed a bill to raise duties.
The senate was for reform, and substituted a bill by David A. Wells,
special commissioner of the revenue and a trained econo-
mist. It lowered rates on most manufactured articles B^
and to a larger extent on raw materials. It sought to
make a wise readjustment and gradual reduction by which protected
interests should suffer in the least possible degree. It was unaccept-
able to the house, and was not passed. But one feature of it, a higher
rate on wool, was passed by a special bill in the same year. 2. In
1870 congress again took up the tariff in response to a popular demand
for reform. The duties on several unprotected articles were lowered,
but the only protected article reduced was iron ore, the rate on which '
was cut from nine to seven dollars a ton. On many other articles,
as steel rails, marble, and nickel, the duty was raised. 3. In 1872
there was a surplus revenue of $100,000,000. It was useful for
paying the debt, but it called attention to the excessive taxes, and
again congress was forced to take action. In anticipation of legis-
lation the lobby became active. It was a fair opportunity for manipu-
lation, and congress, apparently to avoid the liability of being over-
reached in the adjustment of individual rates, adopted the principle
of horizontal reduction. Ten per cent was taken from existing
rates on the important protected articles, that is, woollens, cottons,
most metals, paper, glass, and leather, while tea and coffee were made
free and considerable cuts were made on salt, coal, and some other
articles not manufactured in the ordinary sense. The bill passed against
the opposition of the manufacturers. 4. The panic of 1873 brought
about a reduction of imports and lessened the revenues. The pro-
714 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
tectionists supported the need of high rates, and in 1875 the ten per
cent taken off in 1872 was restored.
There was no disposition to meddle with the tariff during the
four lean years that followed 1875, but with the advent of prosperity
came abundant revenues, and in the eleven years from
Surplus. tlie beginning of 1880 to the end of 1890 the average surplus
was $103,000,000 a year. It went to pay the debt,
$1,105,000,000 worth being extinguished in this interval at a saving
in interest of $69,000,000 a year. It was a wonderful record, and no
other nation has done as much, but the results brought serious com-
plaints. The financiers said the surplus disarranged the course of
trade, the national banks complained that they must pay ruinous
prices for bonds to secure their bank notes, and the public complained,
because for the government to buy bonds at high premium was
extravagance. Surplus financiering, it was also pointed out, causes
extravagant spending. In this, however, the danger was lessened
by the fact that the democrats, ever inclined to economy, were gen-
erally in control of one or both houses of congress during the years
of the surplus.
In 1882 the surplus was $145,600,000, and four per cent bonds rose
from 112 to 121. It was the year for congressional elections, and
the tariff was an issue. There was a group of Eastern
Sentiment democrats, chiefly from Pennsylvania and New Jersey,
in 1882. wno dared not favor reduction, but most of the party
were for reform. Most of the Eastern republicans were
against it, but a small group of Western republicans felt compelled
to vote for it because of the feeling in their districts. In later years
the alignment was more distinct, but in 1882 it was clear enough to
show which was a high and which a low tariff organization. The
democrats stood openly for lower duties, and when in the election
they converted their minority of 19 in the house into a majority of
77, it was believed that the country indorsed them. Their opponents
understood the warning, and in December, after the election, Arthur,
supported by Folger, his secretary of the treasury, recommended a
reform of the tariff.
Weary of "tinkering," desirous of avoiding the assaults of the
lobby, and convinced of the iniquities of a horizontal reduction,
congress, still republican, appointed a tariff commission.
SsSonoT" That a group of exPerts sha11 readjust the duties so as
1882. to lop off a given number of millions in order to reduce
the revenue, , and do it in such a way as to distress
industry least is an attractive idea. But it is too much to expect
that congress should surrender the tax-levying power to such a group.
The tariff commission of 1882 was given the power to recommend
reduction. This pleased the protectionists, for it tended to quiet
the people, it postponed action, and it left the question finally in
THE DEMOCRATIC SUCCESSES 71$
congress, where they would have an opportunity to oppose it. The
commission was ordered to suggest "a revision of the existing tariff
upon a scale of justice to all interests." At the head of it the presi-
dent, after receiving several declinations, placed John L. Hayes,
secretary of the American Wool Manufacturers Association, an assur-
ance that the tariff would be reformed by its friends. Yet the com-
mission's report favored a reduction of about 20 per cent. The republi-
can house, unwilling to concede this much, prepared a bill with smaller
reductions, and slowly debated it, thinking it would not become
law in the existing short session. The senate, with 37 democrats,
37 republicans, and 2 low tariff independents, prepared a bill, with
still lower rates, attaching it as an amendment to an internal revenue
bill then before it. Conferences between the two houses ensued,
and the result was the tariff of 1883. The zeal that now
possessed the republicans was due to the recent democratic
success. If the coming congress made a tariff bill, it
would be more extreme than one made by the existing session, whereas
a bill passed now might so satisfy public sentiment that the republican
president and senate would be safe in blocking the way to a bill in
1884. Under this impulse the tariff of 1883 was enacted. By some
shrewd manipulation in conference several rates were made higher
than was proposed originally in either house. Three men destined
to be influential in future tariff legislation, Senator Aldrich and
Representatives Thomas B. Reed and William McKinley, Jr., were
prominent in connection with the bill ; but the last-named refused to
vote for it because the schedules were too low. He represented the
Cleveland, Ohio, district, in which iron interests were very strong.
Nineteen democrats, led by Samuel J. Randall, of Pennsylvania, most
of them Eastern men, voted against the law. Their action indicated
a party division which was to bring to naught many other democratic
hopes of tariff reform.
In the next congress, 1884, the democrats undertook to redeem
their promise by introducing the Morrison bill. It placed salt,
lumber, and coal on the free list, and reduced other articles
20 per cent. It was thought a horizontal reduction would ^JJm
avoid juggling and preserve the existing ratio of advantage
between various interests. Forty democrats joined Randall in help-
ing the republicans to defeat the bill in the house, while only 4 re-
publicans, three from Minnesota and one from New York, voted for it.
The bill of 1883 made little change in the surplus: that of 1884
would have lowered it $30,000,000. In the latter year a
temporary check of prosperity reduced the imports, and ?urpg"sd b
the surplus for the year 1885 fell to $63,500,000. This Hard Times,
tended to quiet the sentiment for tariff reform, but
the feeling revived in 1887, when the surplus again reached $100,-
000,000.
716 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
THE ELECTION OF 1884
The election year of 1884 found the republicans divided. Arthur's
success as president gave him a claim, and persons who disliked some
of the party tendencies favored him as a safe and respect-
Republi- abie man without special defects. A larger portion of
nate ^e Partv supported Elaine. He was always a strong
Elaine. leader, and the retirement of Conkling gave him an
opportunity to unite the New York republicans in his
support. He did it through the aid of Platt, who remarked with
unexpected coyness that it was now Elaine's turn. There was, also,
a group of reformers who supported Edmunds, of Vermont. Besides
these, Logan, Sherman, and Hawley were "favorite sons" respec-
tively of Illinois, Ohio, and Connecticut, each with a small following.
The convention assembled at Chicago, June 3, 1884 ; and the air was
tense with feeling in behalf of Elaine. It was evident that other
candidates would have to fight hard for victory. On the first ballot
he led with 334^ votes to 278 for Arthur, 93 for Edmunds, and 112 J
scattering. On the second, Elaine gained, chiefly at the expense of
the reformers; on the third he continued the progress, and on the
fourth he was nominated. John A. Logan was made the candidate
for the vice-presidency. The result was received harmoniously by
all the factions, except the reformers, who, however, were not
strong enough to make serious trouble at Chicago. Their sup-
porters were less pacific, and took steps to oppose the nominee at
the polls.
The eyes of the democrats were drawn, in the meantime, to a figure
which had recently appeared above their horizon. Grover Cleveland,
elected mayor of Buffalo in 1881, and governor of New York by a
plurality of 192,000 in 1882, seemed their most promising man.
On the other hand, he was not popular with his party.
Nominated. ?e was new to the service> downright in his honesty,
impartial, opposed to ordinary methods of party organiza-
tions, and too blunt to be liked by the politicians. Tammany, the
most important organization within the party in New York, had
strong intuitions against him. With some difficulty its leader,
John Kelly, was brought to favor his nomination, but he lived to
regret it. Cleveland's best card was the probability that he could
carry New York. The democratic tide showed recession in some
elections in 1883, but it was likely that it would persist to a degree
sufficient to decide the result nationally in 1884. It was also in
Cleveland's favor that the independent republicans would largely
favor him against Elaine. He was nominated on the second
ballot, and Thomas A. Hendricks, of Indiana, was named for vice-
president.
ELAINE'S RECORD ASSAILED 717
The campaign soon brought Elaine's record to the front. His
name was associated with some of the irregular transactions of Grant's
time, but he was not shown to be guilty. He was less
lucky in regard to the " Mulligan Letters." In 1869 ^
he sold to friends in Maine some bonds of the Little Rock
and Fort Smith Railroad Company. It was a mushroom
concern, and purchasers ordinarily got with their bonds equal amounts
of preferred stock, common stock, and land bonds, four dollars in
securities for each dollar of cash paid. In this case Elaine retained
the land bonds himself. After a time the company fell into difficulties,
the Maine purchasers began to repent their bargain, and Elaine feared
lest the retention of the land bonds should become known and damage
him politically. He exerted himself to the utmost and raised money
enough to refund the purchase money, taking all the securities on
his own hands. If these should fail, he would lose nearly all the
property he had; and the market for them was bad. But he sold
a large part of them to the Union Pacific and other railroad companies
at prices considerably above the market. When this was known
people asked why should the Union Pacific, a company continually
affected by legislation, pay Speaker Elaine more than Fort Smith
stock was worth. So much was said that Elaine in April, 1876,
when he was a candidate for the presidential nomination, demanded
an investigation. The house appointed a committee which sat
late in May. Before it came James Mulligan, a former clerk of the
Boston business firm from whom Elaine got the stock, a firm with
whom he had much correspondence. Mulligan told the committee
he had some letters from Elaine to the Boston house, and was directed
to produce them next day. This filled Elaine with dismay. He
sought Mulligan at his hotel and saw the letters in the presence of
a third party, finally getting permission to have them over night on
the promise he would return them next day. In the morning he
refused to give them up, claiming Mulligan had them wrongfully ;
nor would he submit them to the committee. News of this got
abroad, and his opponents, democrats and republicans, presented it
in as bad light as possible. Elaine could not stand the pressure, and
resolved to meet the charge in a most dramatic manner. He appeared
in the house as an injured man whose private affairs were pried into
by democratic opponents, some of whom were Southerners. He
denounced the trick they played on him, declared he had a right to
withhold the letters, but announced he would read them of his own
will to show how little wrongdoing was in them. Interlarded with
his own comment, and with a wonderful personal mastery of the
audience, the letters were made to appear harmless. He finished
the scene with a master stroke of acting. He knew a cablegram in
his favor had been received by the democratic chairman of the investi-
gating committee. It had not been announced ; and Elaine finished
718 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
his speech by boldly walking down the aisle to the seat of the chairman
and charging him with suppressing important evidence in behalf
of the defendant. The chairman had no defense, quailed visibly,
and the audience broke into an uproar of applause.
The enthusiasm of congress was transmitted to the press by the
reporters, who were carried off their feet by the speech of Elaine, and
the republicans throughout the country were satisfied.
Effect ^ut ^me Brought reflection, and in the cold type of the
Congressional Record the letters seemed to have something
which was not explained. They probably prevented Elaine's nomina-
tion in 1876 and in 1880. The campaign of 1884 was hardly opened
before these letters were brought out, and September 15 the papers
contained other letters from Elaine to the same correspondent, not
hitherto made public. Curtis, editor of Harper's Weekly, declared
that they corroborated the first installment. As a whole, the Mulligan
letters placed a blot on the name of a great man, which the defense
uttered has not removed.
The campaign was noted for personalities . The republicans , writhing
under the charges against their candidate, attacked the private
reputation of Cleveland, charging him with grave sexual
Attacked irregularities. The charge had some apparent foundation
in his early life, but it was widely exaggerated and the
offense was long since atoned for. An investigation showed how
unfairly it was presented, and before this and before the frank attitude
of Cleveland himself the matter was overlooked.
The reformers in the republican party were bitterly opposed to
Elaine. A£ Chicago they supported Edmunds, giving him 93 votes
on the first ballot and 41 on the last. Among them were Senator
Hoar, W. W. Phelps, Andrew D. White, and two young
Reformers men> Theodore Roosevelt and Henry Cabot Lodge.
As politicians they would not jeopardize their careers
by repudiating the nomination, but there were other reformers un-
embarrassed with political expectations. Soon after the convention
adjourned an address was issued by a committee of which George
William Curtis was chairman, calling on independents to vote for
Cleveland. It received vigorous response in many parts of the union.
The public was impressed when it saw such men as Henry Ward
Beecher, Carl Schurz, James Freeman Clarke, George William Curtis,
and William Everett turning to the democratic party. The editor
of the New York Sun, who had a keen dislike for reformers, dubbed
them "Mugwumps," a word hitherto of doubtful meaning, probably
of Indian origin. They had the support of several important news-
papers and literary men.
As the canvass proceeded it was evident that New York would
decide the battle. The state was filled with speakers, processions
of various kinds addressed the candidates, and feeling was exceedingly
CLEVELAND PRESIDENT 719
warm, A small incident at the end of the campaign probably had
much influence on the result. One of the addresses to Elaine was
made by Rev. S. D. Burchard, a New York minister and
a warm Elaine supporter. He assured the candidate
that he and his friends would not vote for the party of
"Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion." Elaine in reply did not notice
the thrust at the Catholics, and the democratic press loudly charged
him with insulting that important portion of the voters. He tried
to explain, but it was too late. The vote proved so close that this
might have been the turning point.
When the count was made it was seen that Cleveland had 219
electoral votes. They came from the Solid South, Delaware, Indiana,
Connecticut, New Jersey, and New York. Elaine had
the rest, 182 electoral votes. In the popular vote the
democratic plurality was only 23,000. In New York
Cleveland had the lead by only 1149 votes. With such a narrow
margin the issue in the state might have been determined by Dr.
Burchard's remark, the opposition of the mugwumps, the hostility
of the prohibitionists, or some slumbering Conkling defection. The
Nation said: "The real force which defeated Elaine was Elaine
himself. He had created during his twenty years of public life a public
distrust too deep to be overcome by even the most formidable com-
bination of political wiles, money, and treachery ever organized in
this country."
CLEVELAND AND HIS PARTY
Outwardly the election of Cleveland was a break in party history ;
inwardly it was only an incident. A new party control was, indeed,
established, but it did not have power in congress, and the .
deadlock of Hayes's administration continued. Cleveland
had definite purposes in regard to tariff reform, but a republican
senate blocked the way, and only routine affairs could be transacted
in congress. In party history the first administration of Cleveland
rescued the democracy from the condition of an opposition
group and made it a definite and aggressive force. Mere
opportunism ruled it in 1868, 1872, and 1880. In 1876
Tilden gave it a positive character, but this was adopted
for temporary expediency, to take advantage of a situation which the
folly of its opponents created. The nomination of Cleveland was much
for the same reason, but once in power he imposed on his supporters
a positive program, the first since 1856. His principles became demo-
cratic principles, and the American people fought for or against
them for several years.
Cleveland used his own judgment in selecting his cabinet. T. F.
Bayard, of Delaware, was secretary of state, Daniel Manning, of
New York, known hitherto for shrewd political management, became
720 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
secretary of the treasury, W. C. Endicott, of Massachusetts, secre-
tary of war, W. C. Whitney, of New York, secretary of the navy,
His Cabinet A< H> Garland, of Arkansas, attorney-general, W. F. Vilas,
of Wisconsin, postmaster-general, and L. Q. C. Lamar,
of Mississippi, secretary of the interior. Bayard, Garland, and
Lamar were experienced in national affairs, but they were Southerners,
and by that fact were slightly handicapped. Not one of the four
others had seen experience in Washington. Endicott's highest office
hitherto was a judgeship, in which he acquitted himself well, and
Vilas had served in his state's legislature and presided over the recent
national nominating convention. At this time the democratic party
had met its opponents in congress on equal terms for ten years. It
is indicative of the unformed state of its Northern branch that not
an experienced man of that wing was called to a cabinet position.
The president was pledged to support civil service reform. He
was at once beset by a horde of office seekers, and his supporters
in congress marshaled them. The recently established
men ^ classified service was mostly kept intact, but removals
for partisanship occurred freely in the unclassified service.
Vilas created dismay among the reformers by announcing such a
policy for fourth-class postmasters. The Baltimore post office was
under civil service rules, but the postmaster there made removals
and filled the places with democrats, saying in reply to his critics,
"I am sure my course in this respect has met the approval not only
of democrats, but also of fair-minded republicans, and I shall not
concern myself as to the views of Mugwumps." Henry Watterson
defined offensive partisanship thus: "Officially every man is offensive
who is not in sympathy with the party in power." In view of this
feeling Cleveland did well to remove no more than two-thirds of the
officials not under the civil service rules. He wished to avoid a split
with his party and announced a policy of equalization which he
observed in general. Many of the reformers believed he did the best
he could, but others were displeased and forsook him.
As a reformer Cleveland, had no sympathy from two groups of
democrats, a "machine" element somewhat like the "stalwarts"
among the republicans, and the high tariff democrats of
cf^'l d ^e ^ast- ^ t*16 former> Senator Gorman was a promi-
Democrats. nent leader. He rose to power in Maryland by the ordi-
nary methods of machine politics, and maintained himself
through unusual ability. He was a silent, bland, clear-headed man/
an astute leader, and an unyielding opponent. He and the men whom
he represented had no taste for reform. Tammany Hall, controlling
the party in New York City, was equally opposed to reform. Gov-
ernor Hill, of New York, was in sympathy with Tammany and openly
declared his objections to the administration. His election to the
United States senate, in 1891, gave an able leader to the malcontents
CLEVELAND AS TARIFF REFORMER 721
and a worthy assistant to Senator Gorman. Cleveland was also
viewed unfavorably by the high tariff democrats. They were led by
Randall of Pennsylvania and were strong in that state, New York,
and New Jersey. Randall showed his antipathy to reform in 1886
by introducing into the house a bill to repeal the Pendleton act.
The democrats dared not pass it, but it strengthened the mover with
a certain section of the party.
TARIFF REFORM UNDER CLEVELAND
The democratic platform of 1884 reflected the divided opinion in
the party. It merely promised tariff revision in the spirit of fairness
and without injury to American industry. Cleveland,
however, went further, and in his first annual message,
December, 1885, suggested the adoption of a tariff for revenue only.
A bill to that effect was introduced into the house, but thirty-five
Randall democrats united with the republicans to prevent its consider-
ation. In the autumn after congress adjourned, 1886, the democratic
majority in the house was reduced from 40 to 12, and Morrison, leader
of tariff reform, was among the rejected ones. Symptoms of panic
appeared in the party, but they did not reach the president. In the
message of 1886 he renewed his arguments for reduction. Congress
paid no heed, and the short session passed without a tariff bill.
The situation within the party was now little less than war. Cleve-
land felt that he must win his fight by appealing to the country over
the heads of the congressmen. His annual message of
1887 was entirely devoted to the tariff. He demanded a
tariff for revenue and pointed out most forcibly the dangers
of surplus financiering. He disclaimed the advocacy of
free trade, which his opponents imputed to him, and said, in a phrase
that was often repeated, "It is a condition that confronts us, not a
theory."
The message was followed by the Mills bill, 1888, in which the duties
were to be reduced from an average of 47 per cent to an average of 40 per
cent. It rejected horizontal reduction, embodied in the
Morrison bill, and gradual reduction through the enlarge- gme l88gs
ment of the free list, embodied in the ill-fated bill of 1886,
and took up the task of general revision, schedule by schedule. The
president watched the bill closely as it went through the house by
a majority of 13, and was believed to have secured its passage by
threatening to veto bills for public buildings. It was not considered
in the senate, where the republicans ruled and were preparing a bill
expressive of their own ideas. Each bill was really a manifesto for use
in the election then at hand.
722 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
THE ELECTION or 1888
In 1887 Cleveland's chances for nomination were considered doubt-
ful, and Hill, the leading anti-Cleveland man and favorite of the
New York democracy, was much talked of. But Cleve-
C eland land's course in the following winter and spring removed
nated. " an< tm<s doubt. He gave his party its issue and was so
evidently the logical candidate that even Hill said he
should be nominated. He was chosen without opposition by the
party convention at St. Louis, June 5, and Allen G. Thurman, of
Ohio, was named for his running-mate. The platform was all Cleve-
land wished.
This situation pleased the republicans, who believed that so many
tariff democrats would join them that they must surely win. Their
most likely candidate was Elaine, who had lost little
NoSnated. of his popularity through the defeat of 1884. He was
traveling in Europe in the first half of the year and would
not say whether or not he desired the nomination. Either his health,
or the fear of defeat, or an aversion to another campaign of personal
abuse finally decided him, and he definitely declined at the very time
the party convention met in Chicago, June 19. Several other candi-
dates were before the convention. Elaine, in withdrawing, suggested
Benjamin Harrison, of Indiana, and after three days of balloting he
was selected, with Levi P. Morton, of New York, candidate for the
vice-presidency. The platform was long, but its most important
plank gave open allegiance to "the American system of protection'*
and — with a squint at the surplus — demanded liberal appro-
priations for the navy and pensions.
The campaign was noted for a freer use of money by both sides
than hitherto. The democrats, spite of the Pendleton act, are
believed to have received large contributions from the
T^.e c*™~ officeholders, as well as from other sources. The repub-
isas! ° licans could not appeal to this class, but they had a greater
resource in the manufacturers. The solicitation of funds
from such persons was popularly called "fat-frying." It was believed
that votes were freely purchased. Probably both sides were guilty,
but the greatest blame was laid at the door of the republicans.
Dudley, treasurer of the republican fund, is known to have written
to a lieutenant in Indiana, "Divide the floaters into blocks of five
and put a trusted man with the necessary funds in charge of these
five, and make him responsible that none get away, and that all
vote our ticket."
New York was again the deciding state, and several causes united
to make it favorable to Harrison. In the first place he had not the
bitter enemies who opposed Elaine in 1884. Also, Tilden's friends in
the state were discontented because they thought their leader had
CLASSES OF POLITICIANS 723
received scant courtesy from the democratic administration. Some
of the civil service reformers were disappointed in Cleveland's ap-
pointments. More important than all else was Tam-
many's open defection. It was charged that its devotees
"traded" Cleveland votes to elect their champion,
David B. Hill, governor of the state. The fact that he ran ahead
of Cleveland at the polls by 14,491 votes and was elected seems
to prove the charge. All these things, irrespective of the tariff
question, would have accounted for the change from a democratic
plurality of 1149 in 1884 to the Harrison plurality of 13,002 in 1888.
The electoral vote was Harrison 233, and Cleveland 168, but in the
popular vote the democrats had a plurality of 100,000.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN A NEW STAGE
If the democrats showed a renewal of life the republicans showed
even more plainly that they were entering on new conditions. The
party was a more perfect machine and less under presi-
dential authority than ever before. Moreover, the per- T®J!L
, . - ,J ... . ~. , , , Leaders,
sonnel was shifting. In it Sumner had no modern counter-
part, Schurz and the liberals were in revolt and acting with the enemy,
Garfield had no successor, and even Conkling, powerful through his
intellect, could not be matched in an organization which surrendered
itself to men like Senators Quay of Pennsylvania and Platt of New
York. Bishop Potter. characterized them as holding "the conception
of the national government as a huge machine existing mainly for
the purpose of rewarding partisan service." A group of new men of
a better type existed in congress, McKinley and Thomas B. Reed
being the most conspicuous examples, but they did not shake them-
selves loose from the control of the machine. Of the older group
only Blaine and John Sherman remained; both were weakened in
health, and were borne along by forces they could not control. Blaine
became secretary of state in the new cabinet and lent it the prestige
of his name. Windom, of Minnesota, a politician rather than a fin-
ancier, became secretary of the treasury, Redfield Proctor, of Ver-
mont, secretary of war, Benjamin F. Tracy, of New York, secretary
of the navy, W. H. H. Miller, of Indiana, attorney-general, John
Wanamaker, of Pennsylvania, postmaster-general, John W. Noble,
of Missouri, secretary of the interior, and Jeremiah M. Rusk, of Wis-
consin, secretary of agriculture. They proved themselves good heads
of department, for all they were unknown to the country. Wana-
maker's appointment occasioned much comment because
it was known he had made a large contribution to the CtL^et
campaign funds, and public opinion persisted in thinking
the office was Quay's reward for it. He had risen to prominence as
a successful proprietor of a department store in Philadelphia.
724 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
The republicans now controlled both branches of congress for the
first time in eight years, and were determined to enact their party
program. In the house obstruction had become a power-
OtSruction. ful weaPon> and this must be broken down. A common
method of defeating legislation was to consume time in
dilatory motions. Another was for the minority to fail to answer a
roll call when a few of the majority were absent and to raise the point
of no quorum, which by the constitution must be a majority of the
house. The republicans employed both methods freely when in the
minority, but were now determined to abolish them. Thomas B.
Reed, the new speaker, a blunt man who could not be confused, was
just the man to carry out their wishes.
The session opened with much filibustering in the house. Finally
on January 21, 1890, Reed refused to appoint tellers on a democratic
ff motion to adjourn. The omission would have been a
ReecT serious breach of duty had the motion been made in good
faith, but it was plainly dilatory, and the house sustained
him. He also announced he would entertain no such motions in the
future. The democrats were angry, but they became still more en-
raged eight days later when he counted a quorum. When a motion
was put there were 161 yeas, 2 nays, and 165 not voting, the last
being democrats. The usual point of "No quorum voting" was
made, when to the surprise of the minority Reed began calling the
names of democrats before him and ordered the clerk to record them
as present. A storm of protests arose in which mingled cries of
"revolutionary," "unconstitutional," and "usurpation." Bland
shouted in the face of the speaker, "You are not a tyrant to rule over
this house or the members of this house in any such way, and I de-
nounce you as the worst tyrant that ever presided over a deliberative
body." Reed paid no heed to the storm, but continued calling the
names of the democrats, remarking several times, "The chair must
proceed in an orderly manner." The wrangle lasted a fortnight, and
ended only when a rule was adopted to allow the speaker to count as
present members he saw before him. This rule and another against
dilatory motions were adopted by counting a quorum. Reed's pro-
ceedings caused much comment out of doors. Democrats generally
pronounced him a "Czar," but as the atmosphere cleared, his position
was indorsed by fair-minded people, and the democrats at the next
session in organizing the house felt constrained to accept it, although
they gave the rules committee and not the speaker the deciding
function.
THE McKiNLEY TARIFF AND THE SURPLUS
The obstructionists muzzled, the majority turned to the double task
outlined in the platform of 1888. There should be a new tariff con-
REPUBLICANS IN ENTIRE CONTROL 725
sonant with the aggressive school of protection, and the surplus
should be reduced. Harrison expressed both ideas in
his inaugural and in his first annual message, and con-
gress willingly carried out his suggestion.
While the house was closing its long debate on the Mills bill in the
early autumn of 1888, the republican senate prepared a tariff bill of
its own, a kind of manifesto of protection for effect in
the election. In the following short session it passed the ™e
bill as a substitute for the Mills bill, and here the matter Ta^iff< '
rested when the session ended in March. The bill sup-
plied a working program for the next congress which, soon after
convening, sent it to the ways and means committee, William Mc-
Kinley, Jr., chairman. In a short time it came back with a few
changes and was known as the McKinley bill. It easily passed the
house and finally got through the senate after the " Silver Senators"
were conciliated by the passage of the Sherman silver law. But the
debates were long and the bill did not became law until October i,
five weeks before the congressional elections of 1890. The chief
features were as follows :
i. The duties on agricultural products were slightly raised to please
the rural West ; but raw sugar, yielding a total revenue of $55,000,000,
was put on the free list, and a bounty of two cents a pound Features
for four years was offered to domestic sugar producers.
As the latter, raised a small part of the amount consumed, there was
in this schedule a net loss of revenue of a little less than $50,000,000.
A duty was placed on refined sugar to protect the American refiners.
2. The rates on bulky iron articles were little changed; in some cases
they were actually lowered. This was because the seat of such manu-
facturing was now in the Pittsburg-Cleveland region, and freights
from seaboard to that district gave a large amount of protection.
3. Less bulky articles, as woollens, cottons, and shoes, produced near
the coast line, were given higher rates, often disguised by a compli-
cated combination of specific and ad valorem duties. Some schedules
were so high as to raise the suspicion that they were designed to exclude
imports.
4. Through Elaine's efforts a system of reciprocity was adopted,
intended to secure trade from South American states. While the
bill was being considered, a Pan-American congress was Rec.
in session in Washington under the special patronage of
the secretary of state. He desired mutual concessions by which South
American products would come to us freely in exchange for our flour
and manufactured articles. Congress ignored him, for all his protest-
ing and scolding, until when the bill was near its adoption the senate
grafted on it a reciprocity clause. In its final form it provided that
hides, molasses, tea, and coffee, as well as sugar, be free ; but if the
president thought a state producing these articles charged unfair
726 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
duties against us, he might impose duties on them at specified rates.
In this form reciprocity was a club with which it was proposed to force
our neighbors into concessions. Through it in 1892 we got reduction
of duties in Cuba, Porto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica,
Trinidad, Barbados, British Guiana, Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras,
Gautemala, and Brazil, and some slight reductions in Germany and
France. Only Colombia, Venezuela, and Haiti were disciplined
for refusing to make concessions.
In his first annual message Harrison suggested liberal appropriations
for pensions, naval construction, and coast defenses, and the hint
was not lost on congress. The economies of the demo-
Generosity crats were thrown aside, and much was heard about ex-
penditures in keeping with the dignity of the nation.
When the congress of 1891-1893 ended it had won the title of "the
billion dollar congress." Reed expressed the feeling of his political
friends in the retort, "This is a billion dollar country."
The most notable increase was for pensions. Both parties feared to
antagonize the soldier vote, and certain politicians had learned the
art of utilizing it by asking for grants in behalf of the sol-
diers which no one dared refuse. Most of these grants
ueiore 1090. , x T , . , , . . " .
were good. No one desired to be parsimonious with the
men who saved the union; but there was danger that the process
should run into extravagance. It might even become a means of
debasing the elections. At first, relief was given to disabled soldiers
and their dependent relatives. Under this plan there were 234,821
pensioners in 1875 receiving $29,270,407 annually. Garfield declared
this was probably the highest point to which pensions would rise ;
but in 1879 arrears were granted increasing the cost by $25,000,000
a year; and by 1885 the cost of pensions was $65,171,937. Besides
this, each session of congress saw the enactment of many private
pension bills, granting relief where the laws would not apply. Many
such bills were worthy ones ; but they were rarely inspected closely,
and had come to be granted as favors to members through a
"courtesy" analagous to "senatorial courtesy." The presidents
formerly signed these bills as a matter of course, but Cleveland in-
vestigated them, and vetoed many which he thought involved fraud.
At this time the republicans carried through congress a bill giving
twelve dollars a month to each old soldier dependent on his own or
another person's labor, and Cleveland vetoed this also. He was
widely criticized as a foe to the veterans, and the republican platform
of 1888 demanded "in the presence of an overflowing treasury" leg-
islation to keep old soldiers from dependence on public or private
charity.
Thus committed, the party did not hesitate to take up a more liberal
pension policy. "Corporal" Tanner, accepted representative of the
soldier vote, became commissioner of pensions, and was said to have
THE SURPLUS BECOMES A DEFICIT 727
exclaimed, " God help the surplus revenue ! " He passed claims freely,
and even looked up persons, some of them rich men, whom he thought
ought to be pensioned. He was so active that Harrison
removed him within a year. The pension act which ofe
Cleveland vetoed now became law. As a result, the ap-
propriation for this purpose rose from $89,000,000 in 1889 to
$159,000,000 in 1893. It remained at nearly the latter amount until
1912, when by the Sherwood act, which neither party was willing
to oppose, additional gifts were made, bringing up the annual expen-
diture to $180,000,000. The act of 1890, like its successor of 1912,
was of twofold purpose ; it was intended to reduce the surplus and
thus save protection, and to have influence on the elections. To
carry it into operation the government has paid since its enactment
over a billion and a quarter of dollars.
The large sums voted for the navy occasioned more satisfaction.
By 1880 wooden ships were discarded in European navies, but they
continued the rule in the United States. Secretary of the
Navy Hunt, a Southerner whom Garfield appointed, took ^Jv
up the task of improvement, and in 1883 two steel cruisers
were ordered. Secretary Whitney, under Cleveland, continued to
urge enlargement, and in 1888 he secured $17, 000,000 for that purpose.
These plans were unrealized when Cleveland went out of office, but
the liberal gifts under his successor increased the strength of the navy,
so that in 1893 it contained 22 steel ships and had risen from twelfth
to fifth place among the navies of the world.
THE TARIFF LEGISLATION OF 1892-1897
When congress met in 1889 the surplus was $105,000,000. By aban-
doning the sugar duties and levying prohibitive duties in other sched-
ules the revenue shrank nearly $100,000,000. At the same
time the republicans spent so largely that had some of The
the items not required a long time for completion there
must have been an annual deficit. Seven months after Finances,
the McKinley bill was passed the treasury ceased to buy
bonds except to fulfill the requirements of the sinking fund. The
next year even this went by default, and in 1892 came the first quar-
ter's deficit in many years. It was a new experience to most of the
people, and impressed them deeply. Harrison was alarmed, and made
efforts to check the spirit of extravagance he had let loose. Tanner
was sent off and granting pensions was curbed, but the swollen lists
could not be reduced. Pressure on congressional committees tem-
pered the appropriations of 1891, and a phenomenal wheat crop, 1891,
resulted in large importations of merchandise which increased the
revenues and saved the administration from serious embarrassment.
728 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
Outside of congress the tariff aroused opposition. Merchants raised
their prices and attributed it to the McKinley bill. Abroad we were
charged with raising a Chinese wall around our trade.
of Vsoo18 Importations decreased, to the great loss of the merchants.
A month after the bill passed, when its unpopularity was
highest, came the congressional elections. The result in the house
was 235 democrats, 88 republicans, and 9 Farmers' Alliance can-
didates, a republican loss of 88 seats.
The popular dissatisfaction lasted for two years, and in 1892 Cleve-
land was elected president on the tariff issue (see page 753). He
proposed a moderate reduction and readjustment to meet
Buf i8llS° tne lar&e revenue needs which the permanent expenditures
of the republicans fixed on the government. He had his
way in the house, where William L. Wilson, of West Virginia, was
chairman of the ways and means committee. He was a scholarly
man, once a college professor, and always a student of finance. The
bill he reported December 19, 1893, was the result of much labor, and
its chief features were: i. Free raw material, as lumber, wool, coal,
and iron ore. This would to some extent recoup the manufactures
for reduction of duties on manufactured products. 2. It reduced
appreciably the duties on most factory-made articles, as silks,
woollens, cottons, glass, and crockery. 3. To repair the deficiency in
revenues which would thus ensue, it raised the internal revenue tax
on liquors and laid a tax on incomes more than $4000. The last fea-
ture was afterwards declared unconstitutional.
The house bill also provided for free sugar, raw and refined. This
brought a protest from the American Sugar Refining Company,
popularly called the sugar trust. Since freight was cheaper
on renne<^ sugar and the cost of refining was greater in the
United States, the proposition gave advantage to the for-
eign refiner ; but the sugar trust was very unpopular, and the house
was disposed to let it stand on its own legs. It found a friendlier
spirit in the senate. In the first place, the Louisiana senators opposed
free sugar unless the bounty of 1890 was continued. As the vote was
close they were an important factor. The senate, therefore, placed
40 per cent duty ad valorem on raw sugar and added one-eighth of
one cent a pound on refined. This was done after a long and doubtful
debate in which the chances for the refiners' clause rose and fell day
by day. Its adoption meant a yearly profit of probably $20,000,000
for the sugar trust, whose stock rose and fell with chances for adoption.
Finally, by the votes of a few senators under the leadership of Gorman
and Brice, the duty was accepted. The press charged that senators
speculated in this stock, whose value was so much affected by their
votes. An investigation was ordered, but as the stockbrokers re-
fused to testify it was impossible to obtain satisfactory light. Quay
admitted having bought stock, but denied that this influenced his vote.
DEFECTS OF DEMOCRATIC BILL 729
The affair left an indelible blot on the fame of the upper house. The
senate thought the bill inadequate to the needs of the revenue, and
raised many other schedules, robbing it of its distinctively
low tariff features. The house accepted it unwillingly,
and it went to the president with the duties at about
the level of the bill of 1883. Cleveland felt the situation keenly:
the bill undid the McKinley advances and did no more. It was a sur-
render of all he fought for in 1888, and involved, as he said plainly,
party dishonor. He would not sign it, nor would he veto it, but left
it to become law in ten days without presidential approval.
As a revenue measure the bill proved a failure. It did not escape
from a system the protectionists had long ago saddled on the revenue
system, of reducing duties on non-protected articles in
order to maintain them on articles of domestic manufac-
ture. The free list was witness of this. If the democrats tiie
had possessed the courage to la'y fair duties on such articles
and to rely on a reduction of the other schedules to give relief to the
consumer, they would have made a bill more in keeping with true
tariff reform. Probably that was the only way to meet the deficit
which the McKinley law created.
The Wilson-Gorman bill was passed at an inopportune time. 1893
and 1894 were years of industrial depression. The deficit which the
McKinley bill produced was not repaired by the new law.
To meet expenses the secretary of the treasury must use Nee^d a*
part of the gold reserve, and bonds were sold to support
specie payment by the government. In the long struggle against
business depression the democratic party lost public confidence. In
1894 its total majority of 83 was supplanted by a total republican ma-
jority of 136, and it ceased to be responsible for the national finances.
In 1896 it dared not fight the conflict on the tariff issue. What
other plans the old leaders might have had were not developed, for
the silver men in the West and South set them aside, reorganized
the party on a silver basis, took William J. Bryan for their chieftain,
and moved to the battle in utter disregard of the wishes of the East.
The republicans nominated McKinley, protection's champion, and
defeated their opponents in a campaign in which silver and protection
were both prominent issues. The failure of the existing law to pro-
vide ample revenue gave them opportunity to revise the tariff, and the
result was the Dingley bill, of 1897. Its provisions were as follows :
On woollens, cottons, silk, linens, glass, and crockery the rates
varied little from the tariff of 1890, and the duty on raw wool was
restored. On iron and steel products the lower rates of
1894 were retained. Wonderful developments in these
lines had transferred the seat of manufacture to the Pitts-
burg-Cleveland region, and the high freights on such products from the
seaboard to this region gave it as much protection as was needed.
730 POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REFORM
The same was true of copper, which was left on the free list as in 1894.
The duty on raw sugar was doubled and the differential of protection
for the refiner was maintained.
The Dingley bill provided sufficient revenue, and through a period
of twelve years after its passage tariff reform was quiescent. The
attack of the Cleveland democracy showed that protec-
^on was very strongly fortified in our economic system.
Agitation. Capital and labor both felt themselves interested in perpet-
uating it. The progress of urban life, so largely dependent
on factory labor and internal commerce, widened the basis of the
movement. In the eighties the tariff reform sentiment of the West
centered in the old Northwest. In the nineties this region was mostly
for protection. After ten years of the Dingley bill a new area of
reform was influential in the agricultural states beyond the Mississippi.
Through cooperation with the South, always for tariff reform in the
main, it began the agitation resulting in the Payne-Aldrich tariff
of 1909 (see page 837).
BIBLOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For general works see: Sparks, National Development (1907) ; Dewey, National
Problems (1907) ; Wilson, History of the American People, 5 vols. (1902) ; Stanwood,
History of the Presidency (1898) ; Peck, Twenty Years of the Republic (1905) ; An-
drews, The United States in Our Own Times (1903) ; Curtis, The Republican Party,
2 vols. (1904); and Johnston, American Politics (ed. 1894). The sources are the
same as for the preceding chapter.
For biographies see : Parker, Grover Cleveland (1909) ; Whittle, Graver Cleveland
(1896) ; Gilder, Graver Cleveland (1910) ; Parker, Writings and Speeches of Cleveland
(1892), none of these books adequately describe the work of Cleveland; Burton,
John Sherman (1906) ; Sherman, Recollections of Forty Years, 2 vols. (1895) ; White,
Autobiography, 2 vols. (1905) ; Hoar, Autobiography, 2 vols. (1903) ; McClure,
Recollections (1902) ; Stanwood, James G. Elaine (1905) ; Hamilton [Dodge], Bi-
ography of Elaine (1895); Dingley, Life and Times of Nelson Dingley, Jr. (1902);
Byars, Life and Times of R. P. Eland (1900); and Hedges, Benjamin Harrison:
Speeches (1892).
On tariff history see : Taussig, Tariff History of the United States (ed. 1905),
opposed to protection; Stanwood, American Tariff Controversies, 2 vols. (1903),
favors protection; and Curtiss, Industrial Development of Nations, 3 vols. (1912);
Howe, Taxation under the Internal Revenue System, 1791-1895 (1896) ; and Dewey,
Financial History of the United States (1903).
On civil service reform see : Fish, Civil Service and the Patronage (Harvard Studies,
1905) ; Tyler, Parties and Patronage (1888) ; Curtis, Orations and Addresses, 3 vols.
(1893) ; Eaton, Government of Municipalities (1899) ; and the reports of the national
civil service commission (1884).
The periodical literature of the time is indispensable to the student. The follow-
ing are most valuable and accessible : The Forum (New York) ; The Nation (New
York) ; The Independent (New York) ; The North American Review (New York) ;
Harper's Weekly (New York) ; and The Atlantic Monthly (Boston.)
For Independent Reading
Gilder, Grover Cleveland (1910) ; McClure, Recollections (1902) ; Austen, Moses
Coit Tyler (1911) ; and Storey and Emerson, Ebenezer Rack-wood Hoar (1911).
CHAPTER XXXV
GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
COMBINATIONS AS HISTORICAL FACTORS
IN the Middle Ages a multitude of competing fiefs were gradually
united in strong hands in obedience to the law of the survival of the
fittest. Much suffering accompanied the process, and the
immediate result was despotism, but gradually the en- T.he Prm~
larged units of government transformed despotism into "ombina-
a rule of nationality out of which eventually came self- tion.
governing states. The last phase could not have been
attained if, in the beginning, the jangling fiefs had not been absorbed.
The analogy between the early stages of this process and the recent
development of industrial combinations has often been remarked. It
is impossible to predict what the future will bring forth, but it would
be singular if the process stops where it is and if out of the existing
concentration of industrial forces there should not come a greater
degree of popular control than has hitherto obtained.
Combination in industry appeared in America in the earliest stages
of settlement. The forests were hardly cleared before the small
farms began to be bought up by the successful settlers;
and the New England cod fisheries were no more than E^[Jy^p~.
fairly established before the small fishermen began to be America! "
replaced by large fishermen. In agriculture and in cod
fishing the limit of profitable combination was soon reached. But
in the era of great capitalistic enterprise, made possible by improved
communications, larger markets, and abundant capital, the limits
were wide. The world was amazed when great enterprises began to
eat up small ones and establish monopolies. For railroads the unify-
ing process began before the civil war, but for other kinds of industry
it was a post-bellum affair.
Before the coming of consolidation the competitive regime existed.
Acting on the laissez-faire theory men felt that industry would thrive
best if unregulated, and that the abuse of one man would
be restrained by his opponent, each underbidding the Th*.Com~
other to the advantage of the patrons. When competitors system,
had free access to the same large markets, competition
became severe. There were price wars between merchants and manu-
facturers and rate wars between railroads, each cutting the throat of
73i
732 GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
the other if he could and saving his own in the best way possible.
The competitive system was immoral and wasteful, and the public
had to pay for it eventually.
Against this were placed the advantages of combination. Relief
from underselling was most notable, and after it came better and
less expensive direction, readier command of capital,
Advantages ability to get cheaper raw material, and the advantage of a
market monopoly. While these things benefited the com-
bining interests, they were liable to be disadvantageous
to the patrons, and out of this grew many efforts at re-
striction. The fields in which combination has gone furthest are
railroads, great manufacturing enterprises or trusts, and banking
consolidation. A parallel tendency, as many persons think, is labor
organizations, whose purpose is to control labor as a commodity, to
protect it against the employers, and to fix the wages which the em-
ployers must pay. The problems arising out of these four forms of
combinations — railroads, trusts, banking systems, and labor unions
— are fundamental in our recent history.
RAILROAD COMBINATIONS
Railroads came into existence in Great Britain about the time they
were first used in the United States, but as the country was smaller
than ours and more densely settled, the English develop-
ment was more rapid. The processes of growth were,
however, the same. First, there were many small lines, built to an-
swer local demands and frequently to give competition between the
same places. Most of them were constructed before 1850. Immedi-
ately began a process of absorption which lasted until 1870. Bank-
rupt roads were bought by richer lines, sometimes there was a merger
by common consent, and sometimes a rival was purchased as the best
means of ending its opposition. The people of England had relied
on competition to protect them from unfair rates. They were alarmed
at the advance of the process of amalgamation, and the statute books
filled with laws and the court dockets with lawsuits to restrain it.
Nothing availed, and they began to think they must revise from the
foundation the theory of railroad management. Some persons be-
lieved state ownership the solution, but this was against the English
spirit and made little headway. Finally the country came in 1873 to
a solution which since then has been in practice with moderate satis-
faction. It was decided to retain the great systems, consolidated
under the operation of natural laws, and to establish a railroad com-
mission with power to regulate rates, forbid evil practices, and enforce
its decisions. It was expected that the commission would have much
trouble to bring the railroads to obey its mandates. The result
was otherwise. The removal of competition destroyed many of the
ORIGIN OF THE GREAT SYSTEMS 733
causes of the trouble, and the roads were as willing to operate their
lines to the best advantage of the public as broad justice demanded.
Thus the work of the commission was simplified. In the United
States railroad development ran through the same three
stages of progress, small roads, consolidated lines, and S1?1*,
great systems under the supervision of a railroad com- states,
mission. It has taken longer for the process to come to
completion, but it is not too much to say that American railroads
under the existing railroad commission have come to a state nearly
like that of the roads in Great Britain.
Consolidation began in the United States about 1850. Eleven
companies once owned the line from Albany to Buffalo, but by this
time they were reduced to seven. By 1857 these were
under one management, and a year later valuable tribu- £*°™
tary lines had been acquired. Thus was built up the Mountains,
main section of the New York Central system under the
domination of Cornelius Vanderbilt. The completion of the Erie
from New York to the lake in 1851 gave a rival system, one not made
up of short lines, but built outright with much difficulty in financing.
Another system was the Pennsylvania, which reached Pittsburg in
1852. It grew up under the direction of Thomas A. Scott, long its
president, as daring and able in railroad management as the president
of the Central. Still another great road from tidewater to the trans-
montane region was the Baltimore and Ohio, which reached the Ohio
river in 1851. Meantime, there was much railroad building in the
West. The Lake Shore and Michigan Southern connected Buffalo
and Chicago, and the Rock Island, extending westward from Chicago,
reached the Mississippi in 1854. Other lines joined Pittsburg and
Chicago, and from the latter city and St. Louis radiated many roads
which kept pace with the march of population into the waste places.
Already there was great rivalry between St. Louis and Chicago for
the distributing trade of the West. The former lost in importance,
and the advantages of river transportation diminished with the in-
creased reliance on railroads. Chicago competed keenly for the new
lines of communication, and her position at the southern point of the
lake system and between the mountains and the Mississippi gave
her an advantage over other points. The line of communication
was destined to be along parallels of latitude.
The panic of 1857 arrested railroad development, and the civil war
prolonged the relaxation of the process. It was not until the late
sixties that it revived, and then the tide ran strong until
the panic of 1873. Accompanying this revival was a desire ^ md-Con-
for a further consolidation. It manifested itself in the tLent."
unification with the Central, of the Hudson River road,
from New York to Albany, and in the lease by the same line of the
Lake Shore and Michigan Southern. Thus the Vanderbilt system was
734 GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
able to ship in bulk from Chicago to the seaboard. The Pennsylvania
was not a whit behind its rival. In 1869 it leased the Pittsburg, Fort
Wayne and Chicago, and got its own access to the gateway of Western
trade. The same result was secured by the Baltimore and Ohio in
1874 by building an extension from the Ohio to Chicago; and the
Grand Trunk in the same year was able to touch the Western traffic
at Milwaukee. In 1882 two other lines were constructed to Chicago,
the West Shore and the Nickel Plate. The Erie was not willing to
lose the trade that might come to it, and achieved the same goal by
building a connecting link. These, with the Pacific roads (see page
680), were the most important railroad developments of the time, but
there were many others in various parts of the country. It was an
era of rapid construction, especially in the newer parts of the country.
The rate wars which followed between these lines delighted the
people of Chicago and other competing points. But the roads
eventually found them expensive and sought to avoid them
Cooperation ^y cooperation. Such efforts first took . shape in simple
agreements to charge uniform rates. The most notable
was arranged by Cornelius Vanderbilt between the five lines then
running from Lake Michigan to the seaboard, but after his death in
1877 it was abandoned because it was difficult to get the roads to
keep the agreement. The next expedient was pools, by which the
roads undertook to pay their profits into the hands of a treasurer of
the pool who would distribute them again in accordance with a previ-
ously accepted ratio. The pool, it was thought, removed all incentive
to underselling. But the roads would not keep the terms of the con-
tract, and pools were eventually abandoned. A general practice
was secret rebates to special shippers. They were given on the
theory that a large shipper should have a special rate. An un-
scrupulous bargainer might expect to get very low rates by playing
one road against another. Still another practice was special rates
for long hauls where there were competing lines. For example, a car-
load of freight could be sent from Pittsburg to Cincinnati and thence
to Philadelphia through Pittsburg more cheaply than from Pittsburg
to Philadelphia direct. Cincinnati had several lines to Philadelphia,
and Pittsburg had only one. In the panic of 1873 two-fifths of the
railroads of the country were in bankruptcy, and 450 went under the
hammer, a process favorable to consolidation.
Railroad cooperation and discrimination between shippers and
shipping points aroused popular opposition, particularly in the grain-
growing Northwest, where the people were peculiarly
dependent on the roads. Then arose a demand for state
regulations to prevent discrimination and to check con-
solidation. It was like the English demand, and resulted in railroad
commissions in many states. It was supported by a farmers' society,
the Patrons of Husbandry, or " Granges," and the resulting legisla-
CONTROL OF RAILROADS 735
tion is frequently called the "Granger laws." Illinois, Iowa, Min-
nesota, and Wisconsin were the scenes of their best success. The
courts upheld the laws creating the railroad commissions, but said the
rates must not be confiscatory. The first decisions seemed to imply
that in the absence of federal law to regulate interstate traffic a state
law on the subject would be binding. In 1886 this feature was changed
by a federal decision in the Wabash case, reserving from state juris-
diction all cases concerning commerce between the states, whether
a federal law on the matter existed or not.
Before this there existed a movement for a national railroad com-
mission, and it was accelerated by the Wabash decision. The result
was the interstate commerce act of 1887, which made
some general regulations, and appointed a commission 5*te
to supervise their execution. The rate-making power
was not granted, but rebates, pools, discriminations, and
the objectionable long hauls feature were forbidden. The commission
might investigate violations of the law, but it had of itself no power
to enforce its decisions, which might be appealed to the courts.
When this feature of the law was passed on by the supreme court the
powers of the commissioners were so limited that they retained little
more than a right to make investigations preliminary to court hearings.
Judge Thomas M. Cooley, of Michigan, was made head of the com-
mission. It did much under his direction to gather statistics and in-
vestigate evils in management, but it had not the power to remedy
the conditions it thought bad. Rebates and discriminations went on
as before, with only a little more secrecy. In 1898 the report of the
commissioners declared with hopeless frankness: "A large part of
the business at the present time is transacted upon illegal rates.
Indeed, so general has this rule become that in certain quarters the
exaction of the published rate is the exception."
Meanwhile, there was an accumulation of popular wrath against
the railroads. By supporting expensive lobbies in the national and
state capitals, by using all the advantages of great wealth in defending
cases in court, and by discriminating between shippers, they lost the
confidence of many farmers and small business men. Manipulation
by railroad directors in the interest of their own stock speculations,
and even the wrecking of a road in order to buy it in again, were freely
charged, and the charges served to heighten popular distrust. The
contest became bitter, and such epithets as "soulless corporations"
and "demagogery " were freely exchanged. Undoubtedly the charges
on each side contained exaggerations. But the opponents of the
roads were strong in state legislatures, and although some of their
efforts to deal with the problem contained crude ideas of social jus-
tice, they carried forward the cause of efficient popular control of
great economic factors.
736 GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
TRUSTS
To consolidate manufactures was more difficult than to consolidate
railroads, partly because of the large number of the former as compared
with the latter, partly because railroads are generally
Combina- natural monopolies, and partly because of the relative
Manu- ease °^ enn'stmg capital in behalf of railroad enterprises,
factures. The advantages of combination were realized by manu-
facturers as early as 1870, when railroad consolidation was
well on the way. But the impediments discouraged the boldest men
from attempting it. Yet each year it became an easier matter, and
this was from several causes: i. In the three decades after the civil
war there was a notable tendency for the particular branches of manu-
facturing to produce a larger output in a smaller number of plants.
2. This was made possible by abundant free capital. The civil war
saw a great increase in bonds and currency and in profits derived
from government contracts of one kind or another. Some of this vast
amount went into agriculture, some into city real estate, some into
trade, and some into railroads, but a large part of it remained ready
for exploitation by the captains of industry. 3. Another cause was
the extension of means of communication. Merchandise was not
only delivered over larger areas, but traveling salesmen went every-
where. Consequently, the most efficient factories were able to secure
the trade which otherwise would have gone to less favorably situated
enterprises. 4. As this process advanced, the imagination of business
men was stimulated, and they were eventually in a state of mind to be
satisfied with nothing less than the entire market in their specific
lines in a great nation.
It was for the Standard Oil Company, the second trust organized,
to demonstrate that manufactures could be organized in monopolistic
production. The task was made easier because it had to
Trust/0 ' d° w*tk a Pro<iuct found in a narrow region and in wide
demand throughout the world. In this respect it ap-
proached the condition of natural monopoly. The success of the
attempt, however, depended most on the ability of John D. Rocke-
feller, its head, who had the rarest foresight, patience, will power, and
sagacity in the selection of his assistants. He began to refine oil in
Cleveland in 1865 at a time when the business with ordinary care
yielded a profit of thirty per cent. In his hands it yielded more, and
by 1870 his company was the largest in Cleveland, and he was revolv-
ing plans to make it the largest in the oil region.
His first move to that end came in 1872, when he united with twelve
of the largest refiners in Pittsburg and the oil fields in forming the
South Improvement Company. Its business was to ship oil, that is
to say, to get special railroad rates for the oil it could market. It
could deliver to any road it chose a large part of the oil business, and
ROCKEFELLER'S IDEAL 737
neither the Pennsylvania, Erie, nor New York Central could hold out
against it. The bargain it made shows the audacity of the men behind
the company. It provided for a rebate on company oil,
added the amount of the rebate to oil shipped by indepen-
dents, and pledged the roads to pay over that amount to company
the company. Thus the combination was able to know
just how much business its competitors did. The company promised
the roads that every refiner outside of the company should have op-
portunity to share in the bargain. How they meant to carry it out is
seen in what follows.
Rockefeller first got authority to enlarge his own capital stock.
He then offered to buy out his rivals for cash or stock in the Standard
Oil Company, of Cleveland. He told them plainly that
to refuse would mean their destruction. Most of them
refused to sell, then saw the railroad authorities and
learned of the advantages given the combination, and finally agreed
to Rockefeller's terms. Thus by three months' negotiation the
Standard gained control of the Cleveland field and raised its daily
capacity from 1500 to 10,000 barrels. It now produced over a fifth
of the refined oil in the country. A furious "oil war" started as soon
as the independents learned that freights would be raised at the dic-
tation of the South Improvement Company. So fierce was the feeling
throughout the oil region in western Pennsylvania and in Pittsburg
that the roads made a show of annulling the contract, and the legis-
lature took away the charter of the company. Next was organized
the National Refiners' Association, controlling four-fifths of the
country's output. It was really a pool formed to limit production,
and fix the price of crude petroleum and the market for refined oil.
It operated a year, and was dissolved in 1873 because it was believed
that some members did not live up to their agreements. It ended
the second attempt of Rockefeller to monopolize the oil business.
He was not discouraged, but he abandoned the hopes of succeeding
through cooperation. His success in the Cleveland field pointed out
a better way, i.e. the establishment of ownership or direct
control by the Standard. Then followed nine years of
patient work for that end. It rested fundamentally on
the surpassing success of the Standard as a manufacturer.
Waste was eliminated, by-products were utilized as never before,
barrels were made in its own cooperage plants, and its own cars and
docks at the seaboard showed how much it was disposed to cheapen its
transportation bills. Meanwhile, rebates were always secured. But
year after year the Standard got its hands on an increasing number of
its competitors. Some it bought outright, some it induced to join
forces, others it leased, and in every case it was careful that the ac-
quisition should be kept secret. In 1882 this process was complete.
The ideal of fifteen years was accomplished and the oil interests of the
738 GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
country were united, and Rockefeller was at their head. It but re-
mained to organize into a corporation the various properties so
painfully brought into one circle. It was then that the trust was for-
mally created.
The nine years of consolidation were nine years of warfare. All the
tricks of the competitive regime were here produced, and on a vastly
Methods larger scale. Underselling was now resorted to with the
surety of crushing the object aimed at, whereas in the
regime of smaller traders it was always doubtful how it would result.
The power of wealth was massed to crush him who dared oppose the
combination. Promises were violated as freely as in the days when
thirty salesmen stalked one buyer. And when the combination was
successful it raised prices to the level of great profits, which, however,
were not so high as in the days of many producers. The people have
not yet decided whether or not the combination was economically
successful, but they are agreed that it was relentlessly organized and
that it is a natural monopoly.
In 1882 Rockefeller had secretly brought into his system thirty-
nine important refiners, producing three-fourths of the oil of the coun-
try, and he proceeded to bring them into a unified control.
Organized First were organized four Standard Oil companies, one
each in Ohio, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania,
and they took over the property of the combination in the respective
states. This feature of the plan was public, and existed by state
charter. To get further union, a central organization was established.
Nine directors of the Standard Oil Trust were appointed, Rockefeller
at their head, and to them the holders of stock in the four companies
surrendered their certificates, receiving in return certificates for similar
amounts of stock in the trust. The trust directors could not sell the
stock they took, but held it in trust for the owners, who, however, could
not demand it back. The trust directors received into their hands all
the profits of the constituent companies and paid them out to the
holders of trust certificates. Other companies besides the four men-
tioned were taken into the trust on the same terms. Each constituent
company retained ostensibly the management of its own business, but
in fact it yielded to the suggestion of the central directors, who were
chosen from the men prominent in the companies. The Standard Oil
Trust was probably the most powerful business organization in the
country, yet it existed without a charter, by private agreement, and
was so secret that its existence was not known outside of Standard
Oil circles until 1888.
Then followed an Ohio suit to annul the charter of the constituent
company in that state: for Ohio law forbade a state
Dissolved corporation to surrender control to parties outside of the
state. The suit was won, but the oil men got leniency by
promising to dissolve the trust. They dallied about this for some years,
THE TRUSTS AND STOCK SPECULATION 739
but at last took refuge in a New Jersey charter. The capital stock of
the constituent company for New Jersey was enlarged from $10,000,000
to $110,000,000, and the trust was dissolved, the whole property going
to the great New Jersey corporation.
Long before Rockefeller proved that the manufacture of an article
could be successfully monopolized, other men were establishing
combinations on the trust plan. The movement be-
came strong late in the eighties. Some enterprises
were established on insecure bases, and in the panic of 1893
many were seriously crippled. Revived prosperity in 1898-1902
brought another wave of trust formation. One ambitious scheme was
the International Marine Company. It took over at extravagant cash
prices some of the leading transatlantic lines. Another was the United
States Shipbuilding Company, which sold stocks and bonds on the false
assertion that influential foreigners had bought them. The "million-
aire's panic," as the stringency of 1903 was called, sent several of these
ventures into bankruptcy. Those that survived profited by a period
of legal restriction and by the experience of the years.
The organization of trusts presented an excellent opportunity for
stock speculation. In most cases the plants of the combining companies
represented only a part of the stock in the new concerns.
The rest represented the increased earning capacity of the JJjJJ^g^J
new enterprise, popularly known as "water." The owners speculation,
of assimilated plants were paid in bonds, preferred and
common stock of the trust, and in some cases in cash. To launch a
trust required a certain amount of cash, and it was usually got from a
banker in exchange for more than an equal amount of securities in the
trust. Thus when such an enterprise began there were in the hands
of the bankers and the former owners of the component companies a
large amount of securities which it was desired to sell to the public.
The occasion favored stock manipulation, and the public got the im-
pression that the opportunity was accepted by many men inside the
trust directorates. When in 1903 the press began to speak of the "un-
digested securities" of the newly organized enterprises, a certain
prominent financier made the apt remark that they were "indigestible
securities."
The organization of trusts elicited a great deal of opposition, not
only from the small competitors who were forced out of business, but
from a public which sympathized instinctively with the
losers. This accumulating dislike was manifest in politics ^Trusts."
and occasioned the investigations of 1888. The facts
then revealed were short of the truth ; for it was sometimes impossible
to inspect the books of the trusts, and some of the officials of these
great companies refused to testify lest they incriminate themselves.
But enough was discovered to show how relentless was the war on
small competitors. The issue became so important in the election of
740 GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
1888 that both political parties were impelled to take action. Decem-
ber 4, 1889, Senator Sherman introduced the measure now known as
the Sherman Anti-Trust Law, which passed July 2, 1890, by a large
non-partisan vote. It declared illegal all contracts to create mo-
nopolies in restraint of competition and made it a misdemeanor punish-
able by a $5000 fine or a year's imprisonment to enter into such a
contract. The law was of wide scope. It included logically any com-
bination which tended to monopolize the output of the branch of in-
dustry to which it applied. It made no attempt to distinguish be-
tween good and bad combinations. It was felt that it was passed to
satisfy a shallow popular demand, and for several years little disposi-
tion was shown to execute it. It was to be the basis of later efforts,
but that is a part of another movement.
BANK CONSOLIDATION
The progress of trusts suggested the consolidation of banking in-
terests, and in this Rockefeller took the lead. About 1890 he and
other Standard Oil men acquired control of the National
feUer*' ^Y -^an^ ^n ^ew York and increased its capital stock
System. until at last it was $25,000,000, only $10,000,000 less than
that of the bank which Jackson destroyed in 1836. Then
began a series of extensions. Sometimes another bank was bought
outright, sometimes it merged with the National City Bank, and some-
times it was merely controlled by having the majority of its stock come
into the hands of persons prominent in the affairs of that institution.
About fifty powerful banks in various cities are said to have been
drawn into this circle. The dozen of these in New York are organized
in two groups, or "chains," containing, besides banks, trust companies
and insurance companies. The two " chains" had in 1903 a combined
capital of $108,000,000, and combined deposits of
System1 $474,ooo,ooo. Side by side with it grew up another great
system headed by J. P. Morgan and Company, including
three "chains" with capital in 1903 of $97,000,000 and deposits of
$472,000,000. The two great systems controlled $205,000,000 of the
$451,000,000 of banking capital in the city. So vast is their. power
that it is doubtful if any great business enterprise could be started
successfully without their help. When the tendency to bank con-
solidation became apparent much was said about "the money trust,"
with power over every other trust. It was alleged that
Trust "^ kv contracting or expanding the bank reserves it could put
up or down the prices of stocks as suited the interests of its
speculating owners. Such a trust was pronounced the climax of all
the movements toward combination. The passage of time has not
brought the predicted evils, and it is certain that the concentration of
banking capital has facilitated the support of the money market in
PROGRESS OF LABOR UNIONS 741
times of panic. In 1912 the Pujo committee, by order of congress,
investigated the " money trust." After taking much testimony it was
not able to say that such an organization exists ; but it made evident
a number of evils which have grown up in connection with the strong
cooperation that exists among the great banking interests.
COMBINATIONS OF LABORERS
When agriculture was the chief American industry, most of the
laborers were engaged in it. But the development of manufactures,
mining, mechanical operations, trade, and transportation
has been rapid and has tended to correct the preponder-
ance of agricultural laborers. In 1870 our agriculturalists
were 47.5 per cent of the persons engaged in gainful occupations, in
1880 they were 44.1 per cent, in 1890 they were 38.1 per cent, and
in 1900 they were 35.3 per cent; while the non-agriculturalist classes
just mentioned were 31.1 per cent in 1870, 32.4 per cent in 1880, 38.5
per cent in 1890, and 40.6 per cent in 1900. As this second group
constitutes the laborers usually organized into unions, it will be seen
how the significance of the labor problem grows with the relative in-
crease of the non-agricultural laboring class.
Local labor unions existed in the United States from the beginning
of the nineteenth century. In 1850 the printers founded the first
national union, and by 1860 twenty- five other trades were
similarly organized. The civil war did not interrupt the unions*
process, and in 1866 a national labor union was estab-
lished, chiefly to agitate for an eight-hour law for federal employees.
It got its desire in 1869, but the act was long unenforced. In 1872
the national organization essayed more active political partisanship
and fell into confusion. Laborers were not willing to give up political
associations at the behest of the labor leaders.
In 1869 Uriah S. Stephens, a Philadelphia garment cutter, estab-
lished the Knights of Labor, a secret organization. It received mem-
bers irrespective of trades and aimed to have a grand army
of laborers, strong enough to force the world to respect
their rights. The founder insisted on secrecy, but some
of the members opposed him in this respect and won their battle in
1881. A leader in the new faction was Terence V. Powderly, twice
elected mayor of Scran ton, Pennsylvania, and destined to be for
several years grand master of the Knights. He had real ability, and
became in Cleveland's second administration head of the national
immigration bureau. After 1881 the organization gained in member-
ship. The ideal of a strong militant movement for labor pleased the
workingmen, and local chapters were established in all parts of the
country. These developments attracted much attention, particularly
among the politicians, and great fears were entertained lest it should
742 GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
become a ruling force in politics. Under this impression its member-
ship was greatly exaggerated. In 1886 rumor put it at 5,000,000,
which was seven times the right number. The leaders of the Knights
were themselves carried away at the prospect of great power, they coun-
tenanced the alarm of the outside world and worked zealously for the
extension of membership. In 1886 they had thus taken
Element m manv men °f radical ideas, some of them anarchists
recently arrived in the country. The conservative element
were able to stop the influx of such men by suspending the enlistment of
members, but those already admitted urged a violent policy, stimulated
the resentment of the rank and file of the order against capitalists, and
carried into operation several ill-advised strikes. They led a move-
ment for a general eight-hour day, and May i, 1886, was set for the
time at which labor would put it into force. When the employers
generally refused to yield, a great many small and some large strikes
followed. Much confusion existed, but the object of the strikers
was not attained.
In April a great strike occurred on the railroads of the Gould system
centering in St. Louis. It began when the Texas and Pacific, one of
the roads in the system, discharged a foreman for cause at
SSfLflr. Fort Worth. The officials of the Knights ordered a strike
LOUIS strike 11 •, -, T
of 1886. because ne was not reinstated on demand. It soon ex-
tended to the whole system, and the situation became
critical in St. Louis. Here the Knights of Labor were under the in-
fluence of Martin Irons, a violent man who kept his supporters keyed
up to a high pitch of excitement. The strikers resorted to violence
and set at defiance the small detachment of federal troops sent to the
city. Special constables sworn in for the occasion were not very
effective, the mob spirit grew, railroad property was burned, factories
were closed, and innocent persons were killed and wounded by the
officers. After several weeks of disorder the strike failed, through the
exhaustion of the strikers.
The other great strike was in Chicago, where freight handlers de-
manded an eight-hour day, and it finally involved 60,000 persons.
In the city were many desperate people, victims of wrong
™?/;hi'ago in every part of the world, and some of them were Knights
strike of * -T *. m <• i •> • *• i
1886> of Labor. Two, professed anarchists, edited newspapers,
the Alarm, by Parsons, and the Arbeiter Zeitung, by Spies.
Both papers incited the strikers to violence, Parsons going so far as to
urge the use of dynamite to dispose of "rich loafers who live by the
sweat of other people's brows." The authorities became alarmed,
probably unnecessarily so, and on May 4 undertook to disperse an
anarchists' meeting in Haymarket Square. A bomb from the crowd
fell among the police, killing seven and wounding sixty. Many
anarchists were arrested and tried for their lives. Seven were con-
victed, of whom four were hanged, one committed suicide in prison,
A NEW LABOR ORGANIZATION 743
and two had sentence commuted to life imprisonment. The country
generally was shocked at the appearance of anarchy in America and
approved of the convictions, although the evidence was circumstantial.
Friends of the prisoners claimed that guilt was not proved. Eight
years later Governor Altgeld, in sympathy with the cause of labor,
pardoned the two life prisoners. He believed their guilt was not
established and that they were victims of popular excitement. His
action was widely condemned.
The conservative Knights realized the discredit their order re-
ceived from the violent element, and tried to remedy it. They did not
succeed, and the result was large secessions from the or-
ganization. A rival movement was about to supplant it. American
In 1881 was formed a Federation of Trades and Labor ^Labon
Unions, the idea of which was that members of the same
trades should organize in their respective interests. They were lost
sight of in the rapid development of the Knights of Labor, but with
the decline of that body after 1886 they came into greater prominence.
They then reorganized as the American Federation of Labor, whose
subsequent growth has been remarkable. In 1910 it reported a
membership of 2,000,000, while the Knights of Labor in 1903 had
dwindled to 40,000. The future of combined labor in the United
States seems to lie with the federative rather than the integrated plan.
The revival of prosperity after 1886 brought relief from strikes, but
the depression which followed the panic of 1893 saw their recurrence.
There were many unemployed men, and much suffering
existed in the winter of 1 893-1 894. In the following spring
a small strike in the Pullman Car works at Chicago was
the beginning of a great conflict. The company felt the
influence of the hard times and undertook to reduce the wages of
4000 employees, members of the American Railway Union, a powerful
and well managed organization. The union supported its members
and demanded arbitration. The company declared that the question
was one of fact, and that there was nothing to arbitrate. A strike
followed, and the union ordered that no train should run which carried
a Pullman car. The roads entering Chicago decided on joint opposi-
tion, and the union tied up successfully all the lines running from the
city to the West. Crowds of strikers impeded the operation of trains,
and groups of violent people, with whom the strikers alleged they had
nothing to do, pillaged freight cars. Governor Altgeld, in sympathy
with the strikers, refused to call out the militia on the ground that it
was not needed. When property owners were in terror lest the law-
less element get the upper hand, President Cleveland intervened,
sending federal troops to guard the mail trains and secure the safety
of interstate commerce. Altgeld protested, saying that the railroads
could not run trains because they could not get men. The facts were
otherwise. They had the necessary men, but the strikers prevented
744 GREAT INDUSTRIAL COMBINATIONS
their employment. Cleveland's action was undoubtedly an unusual
extension of the power of the central government, but it was such a
one as may occur again if the state authorities show an unwillingness
to protect property. In this as in other strikes the public showed a
growing impatience at having to pay the cost of strikes, and were dis-
posed to demand that labor and capital should not go wantonly into
so expensive a means of settling difficulties.
During the Pullman strike the railroads resorted to "blanket in-
junctions," issued against officers of the union and any other persons
whatever. They forbade interference with railroad prop-
erty> an<^ w^tn tne use °f ft» and they were attached to
tions"" cars> buildings, and anything else likely to be the object
of interference. Eugene V. Debs, president of the Ameri-
can Railway Union, was sent to prison for six months for contempt
of court because he ignored such an injunction. In the beginning the
roads had much sympathy from the public, but the resort to injunctions
alarmed many serious person. In issuing them, it was held, the courts
usurped executive functions and lost sight of the original purpose of
injunctions, which were merely remedial and not intended to afford a
method of criminal procedure. In recent labor controversies, in-
junctions have not been so freely used.
Labor unions were once opposed by employers as strenuously as
the general public formerly opposed trusts ; but with the passage of
time the opposition to each has become less bitter. This is possibly
partly due to a conviction that each is inevitable. It seems also true
that there is a more general recognition that each form of concentration
has come to be recognized as useful in some ways. It is to be said,
further, that of late both labor unions and trusts have come to realize
to some extent their responsibility to the public. The opening of the
twentieth century witnessed the beginning of a mighty political
struggle for the public control of combinations of all kinds, a contest
whose history must be reserved for another chapter.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
An abundance of material exists on the economic side of combinations, but little
has been prepared from the standpoint of the political bearing of the subject. The
student of history will have to find his way through such material as is before him,
and in doing so the following will be helpful : On the general subject : Sparks,
National Development (1907); Dewey, National Problems (1907), has a good bibli-
ography; Wilson, History of the American People, 5 vols. (1902) ; and Peck, Twenty
Years of the Republic, 1885-1905 (1906).
On railroad development see: Johnston, American Railway Transportation
(1903); C. F. Adams, Railroads, their Origin and Progress (1888); Ripley, edr.,
Railway Problems (1907) ; Meyer, Railway Legislation (1903) ; Haines, Restrictive
Railway Legislation (1905) ; Adams and Adams, Chapters of Erie (1871) ; and
Dixon, State Railroad^ Control (1896). Important documents are: Report of the
senate committee on interstate commerce (Senate Reports, 49 cong., i ses., No. 46,
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 745
in two parts) ; Report of the industrial commission, vols. IV, IX, and XIX (1900) ;
and Annual Reports of the interstate railway commission (1887-).
On trusts see the following general works : von Halle, Trusts or Industrial Com-
binations in the United States (1895) ; Jenks, The Trust Problem (ed. 1905) ; Ripley,
edr., Trusts, Pools, and Corporations (1905), has a good bibliography. See also:
Tarbell, The History of the Standard Oil Company, 2 vols. (1904), an excellent piece
of investigation spite of some personalities ; Montague, Rise and Progress of the
Standard Oil Company (1903) ; and Jenks, Development of the Whisky Trust (Politi-
cal Science Quarterly, IV). See also: Report of the industrial commission, vols.
I, II. and XIX (1900), and Bills and Debates in Congress relating to Trusts (Sen. Docs.,
57 cong. 2 ses., No. 147), referring to the years 1888-1903. On consolidation of banks
see two articles by C. J. Bullock in The Atlantic Monthly, August, 1003, and May,
1906.
On labor unions see : Ely, Labor Movement in America (ed. 1902) ; Spahr, Ameri-
ca's Working People (1900) ; Powderly, Thirty Years of Labor (1889), especially
good for the Knights of Labor; Mitchell, Organized Labor (1903) ; and Buchanan
Story of a Labor Agitator (1903). On the important strikes see : Lloyd, A Strike of
Millionaires against Miners (1890); Ashley, The Railroad Strike of 1894 (1895),
contains statements of both the Pullman Company and the operatives ; U. S. Strike
Commission, Report on the Chicago Strike, 1894 (1895) ; Carwardine, The Pullman
Strike (1894) ; and the Missouri Bureau of Statistics, Official History of the Great
Strike of 1886 (1887).
For Independent Reading
Lloyd, Wealth against Commonwealth (1894) ; Tarbell, History of the Standard
Oil Company, 2 vols. (1904) ; Buchanan, The Story of an Agitator (1903) ; Ely, The
Labor Movement in America (ed. 1902) ; and Lloyd, Strike of Millionaires against
Miners (1890).
CHAPTER XXXVI
LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
THE BLAND LAW IN OPERATION
THE $2,000,000 in silver coined each month under the Bland law
circulated readily in the West and South, where much of the business
Small sa was ^one on crec^t and a sma^ volume of money was
Notes. r sufficient for cash demands. In other parts of the country
larger quantities of cash were needed, and the people de-
manded it in a less bulky form than silver dollars. Silver was, there-
fore, left in the banks, which sent -it to the sub- treasuries, until in 1885
the accumulation in government vaults was $100,000,000. To force
this out the secretary resorted to strategy. He noticed that green-
backs of small denominations remained in the hands of the public
longer than larger ones, and he resolved to try to keep in circulation
small silver notes secured by the accumulated silver dollars. He first
withheld small greenbacks until they were scarce in the channels of
trade : then he asked congress to authorize the proposed small silver
notes, and in 1886 the permission was reluctantly given. Two years
later he had issued $34,000,000 of these certificates and was with-
holding a like sum of greenbacks. Coin for these new notes was being
stored in the treasury, but the real owners of it were the holders of the
notes.
The success of this experiment was helped by the shrinkage of the
volume of bank notes through the rise in price of bonds. At existing
Silver prices banks preferred to sell the bond securing their
Forced Out. circulation, and it happened that from 1886 to 1890 the
currency was diminished by $126,000,000 in bank notes,
most of it in $5 and $10 denominations. At the same time, 1889-1893,
came a wave of prosperity. Business demanded more money and
was willing to take even the bulky silver. It resulted that whereas in
the years 1878-1886 only $150,000,000 in silver and silver certificates
was put into circulation, in the next four years $200,000,000 was put
out successfully, and the silver in the vaults was reduced to $20,000,000.
Most men concluded that the readiness with which silver circulated
showed it a satisfactory kind of money.
Meanwhile, the free silver movement was not dead. It revived
with the reappearance of hard times in 1885 and a free coinage
bill was brought into the house and lacked only 37 votes of passing.
746
A NEW SILVER LAW 747
The argument supporting it was simple : If times were hard, there
should be more money ; and since silver was considered good money
by its friends, there ought to be more silver. It mattered nothing
that silver bullion had fallen in value steadily since the
passage of the Bland- Allison act and was now selling at 95 J.?vive<?
i f *i i 11 i • Silver Senti-
cents an ounce, the intrinsic value of a silver dollar being ment
80 cents. It must be remembered that although at this
time silver sentiment was strongest in the democratic party, it also had
a strong hold on the republicans, and neither party dared pronounce
against it. Its supporters were a compact group, conscious of their
strength and determined to lose no opportunity to win their battle.
The introduction of the McKinley tariff bill in 1889 gave them the
desired opportunity. It was evident it could not pass the "senate
without the consent of the Far West. It gave ample
protection to the manufacturer, wool grower, and sugar B*trif^jj1
producers, but the silver senators found little in it for their Tariff Men.
constituents, and they let it be known that they would
not vote for it unless something were done for silver. Secretary Win-
dom, of Minnesota, had not the Eastern fear of silver and he was a
good politician. In his annual report, 1889, he suggested that the
government take all the silver bullion offered and make payment in
silver notes. He thought not more than $37,000,000 a year would be
received. Others thought the amount would be much greater. It
was evident that the silver men had the power to carry through a
radical measure, and the conservatives prepared to make concessions.
In the house the latter brought in a bill to coin $4,500,000 a month,
and so little were the gold advocates prepared to dispute it that it
passed the day after it came up for consideration. It
went to the senate along with the tariff bill. The silver
senators now controlled the situation; they substituted
a free coinage bill, laid the tariff bill on the table, and
awaited results. The situation was tense, for it was believed Harrison
would veto a free silver bill, in which case the silver senators would
defeat the tariff bill. The silver bill went to conference, where, by
much address and largely through the efforts of Senator Sherman, a
compromise was arranged. It provided that 4,500,000 ounces of
silver be bought monthly and paid for in notes redeemable in gold or
silver at the option of the government. The law contained the follow-
ing clause: "It being the established policy of the United States to
maintain the two metals on a parity with each other upon the present
legal ratio, or such ratio as may be provided by law." These words
were ambiguous. If they meant the government would keep gold and
silver on a parity and pay gold for silver notes they implied a gold
standard : if they meant the government would see that the two metals
circulated on a parity in the nation, they implied bimetallism. Secre-
tary Carlisle, three years later, gave the law the former interpretation,
748 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
much to the disappointment of the friends of silver, who insisted that
he should pay out both metals in order to maintain parity. The
silver purchase law of 1890 passed by a party vote. The democrats
felt no obligation to support a law which fell short of free coinage, and
the republicans, the Eastern men included, must obey the will of the
silver senators.
The victory of the silver men was facilitated by the recent admission
of four new states, North and South Dakota, Washington, and Mon-
tana. They had been hurriedly granted statehood in
l88°- m tlie belie* tnat tliey would add to the republican
1 8891 890. majority. The elections verified these expectations in all
the states but Montana, which the democrats carried;
but all their senators and representatives were silver men regardless of
party. In 1890 the republicans, with the aid of some silver democrats
in congress, admitted two more states, Idaho and Wyoming. They
thought the currency issue would soon pass, while their gain in the
senate would be permanent.
Utah, whose population of 207,905 well qualified her for statehood,
also applied and was rejected on account of polygamy. A conflict had
long existed between its Mormon and non-Mormon in-
refused habitants, the nation sympathizing with the latter. In
Admission. J882 congress passed a law against polygamy, which was
not enforced. In 1887 a sterner law authorized the con-
fiscation of the property of the Mormon church if it resisted the laws
of congress. The ecclesiastics now became alarmed. In 1890 Presi-
dent Woodruff, their highest official, renounced polygamy, and later
in the year the church did the same. Non-Mormons doubted the
sincerity of this action, and it was not until 1895 that congress would
relent and admit Utah to the benefits and privileges of a state. It
took its place among the free silver states, but at this time the conflict
had ceased to be important in congress and was chiefly waged in presi-
dential campaigns.
THE LAST YEARS or HARRISON
The congressional session of 1889-1890 lasted until October, and
ended in an ominous storm of protest which found its expression in
the elections. The result was a republican defeat. The
two vears following were unfavorable for business, and the
larity popular dissatisfaction survived until it overwhelmed
Harrison in the election of 1892. Much of this was due
to distrust of the republican organization, definitely in the hands of
Quay and Platt. Against this condition Harrison, an upright man
and a capable lawyer, was not able to contend. He had little power of
mastering men, and the impression so widely current that he began
his administration under the tutelage of the party organization was
ELECTION OF 1892 749
not far wrong. His appointment of John Wanamaker to a cabinet
position smacked of Quay. Probably his most unwise action was the
appointment of Clarkson first assistant postmaster-general, who wrote
in glee, February, 1890: "I have changed 31,000 out of the 55,000
fourth-class postmasters and I expect to change 10,000 more before I
finally quit. I expect before the end of the month to see five-sixths
of the presidential postmasters changed. Then I can paraphrase old
Simeon, and say, 'Let thy servant depart in peace.'" Harrison in-
curred further criticism because he appointed several of his family
connections to office. He made few friends, and knew not how to seek
popularity. His relation to "Old Tip," his grandfather, which was
expected to be an advantage, proved to be an embarrassment. It
seemed to suggest aristocracy, and was unmercifully lampooned
by the cartoonists, who always depicted him as a small gentleman
with a prominent forehead over which hung an immense "grand-
father's hat."
Spite of this, it was evident as 1892 approached that Harrison was
the logical republican candidate. He was responsibly associated with
every measure for which the party had incurred criticism.
If he were now thrown overboard, it would amount to a
repudiation of the work of the party in congress. This
view was accepted by most of the party, but Quay and Platt were of
another mind. In the last two years of the administration Harrison
showed signs of repudiating them. He dismissed "Corporal" Tan-
ner and listened less kindly to the suggestions of the organization men.
These leaders, therefore, looking for an opposition candidate, turned
to Elaine, who, although a member of Harrison's cabinet, was not on
cordial terms with him. He was physically weak and mentally ex-
hausted. He had no relish for another campaign of abuse, and his
family were as unwilling for him to be a candidate as he himself. Yet
the scent of battle aroused the old war feeling, and it was with reluc-
tance that he turned aside the advances of Quay. The public, speculat-
ing on his intentions, concluded he would not stand against Harrison
as long as he was in the cabinet. Quay watched the situation with
little comfort.
The nominating convention met at Minneapolis, June 7, 1892.
Three days earlier Elaine resigned his secretaryship in the shortest
possible note, leaving the public to guess whether he had
tardily decided to seek the nomination or merely wished
to discredit Harrison at a critical moment. If he meant
the former he had waited too long. His action had no other effect
than to throw the opponents of the president into confusion as they
were about to go into battle. They did not recover command of the
situation before their opponents carried Harrison to victory on the
first ballot, with Whitelaw Reid, editor of the New York Tribune,
candidate for the vice-presidency.
750 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
Meantime, the democrats were about to assemble in convention at
Chicago, and a resistless drift of opinion was again making Cleveland
their leader. His defeat in 1888 was received by the Gor-
cSeveiand man an(^ ^^ faction with ill concealed satisfaction. He
seemed utterly repudiated, and his opponents looked for-
ward to an era of unopposed control. They ignored him as a party
leader and spoke with affected sympathy of his unhappy indiscretion.
He, however, paid little attention to their attitude, devoted himself to
his profession, made some money, and contented himself with perform-
ing the duties of a citizen. As early as the end of 1890 the reactions
against the McKinley tariff showed that the next campaign would be
fought on the tariff issue, and at once Cleveland began to be con-
sidered the logical democratic leader.
Gorman and Hill were appalled at the prospect, but almost im-
mediately relief seemed to come. The silver issue was not removed
from the arena by the Sherman purchase law. The free
oSVrec*611 s^ver West was more active than ever, and the East in
Coinage. alarm was trying to develop antisilver sentiment. In
accordance with that design the New York Reform Club
held a meeting of business men in February, 1891, inviting Cleveland
to be present. He did not attend, but sent a letter in which he said :
"If we have developed an unexpected capacity for the assimilation of
a largely increased volume of the currency, and even if we have dem-
onstrated the usefulness of such an increase, these conditions fall
far short of insuring us against disaster if, in the present situation, we
enter upon the dangerous and reckless experiment of free, unlimited,
and independent silver coinage." This lumbering sentence left no
doubt of his position, and was quoted far and wide. It won applause
from friends of gold and denunciation from silver men. The latter
were strong in the democratic party, and it seemed that their opposi-
tion must prove the end of Cleveland's chances for the nomination.
Again his opponents pronounced him dead, but the end of the year
brought a change of view. Each party was hopelessly divided on
silver, and neither could throw aside the tariff issue for any other
fighting ground. The autumn elections in Ohio and in some other
states showed democratic gains on that issue and the party dared not
drop it. If Cleveland's plan of battle was used, he was the logical
battle leader.
His opponents concentrated their strength on Hill, and Gorman,
leader of the party caucus in Washington, gave full support. To carry
Hill' c ^an tnrou&n it was necessary that the New York
didacy nominating convention should indorse it. The New
Year's festivities were hardly over when Hill called a
meeting of the state convention for February 22, 1892, thinking by
this early meeting to control the election of the delegates. The
Cleveland men refused to take part in the " Snap Convention." After
THE YOUNG DEMOCRATS 751
a solid Hill delegation was chosen on February 22 the " Anti-Snappers "
called a convention of their own and sent a protesting delegation to
Chicago. It was evident that if Hill were the nominee, he would be
defeated in his own state by the strong independent movement which
his ill-advised action had aroused.
The democratic party in the West and South was in a transition
stage. Discredited by its position in the civil war, it had difficulty in
reestablishing its influence after the return of peace. Its first success
in 1874 was won through the mistakes of its opponents,
and this was true of most of its victories during the next The West-
decade and a half. In this period its leadership was timid, ofn «
, ., ,. . j • j •-! • j r . ^ • j Southern
and its policies were devised with an idea of taking ad- Democrats.
vantage of the mistakes of its opponents. Cleveland, as
we have seen, stood for positive ideas; but they were the ideas of
the East. Throughout the West and South the leaders were still
men of expediency in national matters. By 1890 there had developed
in these sections a party of young democrats, a second group who de-
sired positive policies and disliked the leadership of Cleveland. Both
groups favored free silver, but the older men were not willing to risk
losing the support of the East, while the younger ones were tired of
deferring to New York and its neighbors. In 1892 the young men
were not quite willing to throw over the counsel of older leaders,
and so when the older men decided that the old alliance should be
maintained they submitted, but it was with misgivings. They eventu-
ally regretted their action, but in the campaign then upon them they
subordinated their views to party welfare, recognized the tariff as
the supreme issue, and united in support of Cleveland as party leader.
The Eastern leaders did not appreciate how deep and earnest this
movement was and how much it was likely to mar their plans in the
future.
The democratic convention assembled at Chicago, June 21. Hill's
friends worked hard for their candidate, and Bourke Cochran put
him forward in an eloquent speech whose burden was that
he could carry New York. On the tariff and on silver Hill Nominated,
was inconclusive, and his oft-quoted declaration, "I am a
democrat," meant that he was a party man who would give the poli-
ticians their way. Against the well-recognized honesty of Cleveland
he could make no headway, and on the first ballot the former president
got the nomination by the two-thirds majority which the party habit-
ually demands in such a case. For vice-president the convention in-
dorsed Adlai E. Stevenson, of Illinois, who was in sympathy with the
old-school democrats of the West.
While the aggressive element of the West and South was thus held
in check in the democratic party, radicalism in these sections burst
party bounds and launched a third party. For several years there
had been much dissatisfaction among the farmers. Low prices of
752 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
cotton and grain had much to do with their conduct, and to this was
added a belief that both the old parties were insincere in professing
friendship for silver and for poor people generally. The
Peo le's movement began in organizations for the general social de-
Party. * velopment of country people, but it soon became political.
It was chiefly expressed in the Farmers' Alliance, which
had two great branches, one in the South and one in the Northwest.
Its leaders were sometimes men who had failed to maintain themselves
in one of the old parties, but they were mostly young men of ability
and devotion. They first went into active politics in 1890 when they
carried the legislatures of Kansas and Nebraska and elected nine
Farmers' Alliance members of congress and forced thirty-four others,
democrats and republicans, to pledge themselves to carry out the
ideas of the farmers' movement. In 1892 they called a great conven-
tion at Cincinnati, and with the cooperation of the labor unions or-
ganized the people's party. This meeting called a party convention
in Omaha in the following July, at which General J. B. Weaver, green-
back candidate in 1880, was nominated on a platform including free
silver, public ownership of monopolies, postal savings banks, and an
income tax. It did not hope to carry the presidency, but by uniting
locally with democrats or republicans as the opportunity offered it
made a strong impression on the campaign. It carried several state
legislatures and sent five senators to Washington. It injured the
republicans more than the democrats, for although it cut into the
democratic vote in the South the large majorities there were safe
against such losses, while the narrower margins of the republicans in
the West were sometimes wiped out by populist defection. On the
main issue of the campaign, the contest between Cleveland and
Harrison, it had little effect.
Between these two men the campaign was a quiet one. It was
marked by an unusual rising of educated men for Cleveland, now
more than ever the hero of the reformers. College pro-
T^.e c*™~ fessors and theoretical free traders favored him and freely
1 89?! ° declared themselves for his election. They gave his side
the appearance of radicalism, which his managers eventu-
ally found it necessary to deny, and they created hopes which, after
his election, could not be realized. During the summer there was a
labor disturbance at Homestead, near Pittsburg, where the employees
of the Carnegie Steel Company went on strike because wages were re-
duced and the union was not recognized. Rioting began, and the
employees fought to hold their places against strike breakers. Fear-
ing the labor vote the governor would not call out the militia until
conditions became alarming. It then took the entire citizen soldiery,
8000 strong, to restore order. The affair was widely discussed in the
country; the Carnegie Company was a dominating factor in the steel
industry, one of the best protected manufactures, and the feeling
A PRECARIOUS FINANCIAL SITUATION 753
aroused against it on behalf of labor operated against the high tariff
party. Cleveland's rugged personality also played a strong part in
the election. He was in such striking contrast with Harrison, the man
of quiet and even honesty, that he seemed to many people the only
hero of the struggle. His success was generally conceded long before
the election. He got 277 electoral votes, Harrison 145, and Weaver 22.
The popular vote was Cleveland 5,556,543, Harrison 5,175,582, and
Weaver 1,040,886. The democrats also carried both houses of con-
gress. They were surprised at the magnitude of their own victory,
and they might well have trembled, for it placed heavy obligations
upon them.
CLEVELAND AND THE PANIC OF 1893
Cleveland could hardly be expected to call members of the Hill
faction or Western silver men into this cabinet. He turned, therefore,
as in 1885, to the South, the independents, and the less
widely known of the Northern democrats. The composi-
tion of the cabinet was as follows: W. Q. Gresham, of
Illinois, secretary of state, John G. Carlisle, of Kentucky, secretary of
the treasury, Daniel S. Lamont, of New York, secretary of war, Hilary
A. Herbert, of Alabama, secretary of the navy, Richard Olney, of
Massachusetts, attorney-general, W. S. Bissell, of New York, post-
master-general, Hoke Smith, of Georgia, secretary of the interior, and
J. S. Morton, who led the antisilver democrats of Nebraska, secretary
of agriculture. Gresham had been a republican until 1891, and was
appointed in recognition of the support of the independents. Taking
him widened the breach between Cleveland and the Gorman-Hill fac-
tion. Lamont had been his private secretary in the first term and
Bissell was an old law partner. Cleveland had not a broad range of
ideas, nor was he widely acquainted with party leaders, and in each
of his administrations he had as many personal friends in the cabinet
as he dared.
Financial difficulties met the administration at its very beginning.
In January, 1893, the gold reserve was only $108,000,000 and the
steady demand to meet the European balance of trade .
was sure to send it lower before March 4. Moreover, it of ig9*m
would be seven months before another cotton and grain
crop went abroad, and meantime Europe, on account of the
business depression, was selling American securities. There was
likelihood that a long period of gold exportation would follow. The
public was so accustomed to think that $100,000,000 was the safety
point for the reserve that it was felt that alarm would surely ensue
if it went below, and there was danger that fears once aroused gold
would be hoarded. Harrison realized all this but felt the problem was
not his. He would be satisfied if the crisis did not come before March
4. To that end Foster, his secretary of the treasury, induced the New
3C
754 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
York banks, at the close of January, to exchange $6,000,000 gold for
legal tenders and when he surrendered office two months later the re-
serve was $100,982,410. The new secretary, Carlisle, could think
of no better plan than Foster's, and throughout the spring cajoled the
banks into a surrender of coin. Meantime, money became very tight
and there came a sudden check of the wave of speculation which for
four years had followed the creation of trusts and the marketing
of many highly inflated securities. The most notable collapse was
the National Cordage Company, which paid a stock dividend of 100
per cent five months before suspension. Throughout the summer
panic conditions prevailed, interior banks could not extend their loans,
and there were over 400 bank failures, the large majority being in the
West. In our financial history 1893 has as black a name as 1873.
The government feared that the public would lose confidence and
hoard gold in the expectation that specie payment must be suspended ;
and this fear was promoted by the Sherman silver purchase law.
Under it the treasury issued nearly twice as much currency
O^the^°n a montl1 as under tne Bland-Allison law, and it was not
Sherman absorbed by the business of the country as formerly, first
Law because of its increased volume, second because of less
prosperous business conditions, and third because after
the enactment of the McKinley tariff the surplus disappeared, bonds
ceased to be purchased, and bank notes ceased to be retired. In-
creasing the currency beyond the necessities of business enlarged the
volume of partially employed notes which might be used to draw gold
out of the treasury.
The silver men thought the reserve might be protected by re-
deeming the silver certificates in silver, but this would undoubtedly
depreciate such notes, then one-third of the currency,
ammg and give an impetus to gold hoarding. In April a rumor
got abroad that the treasury would make such redemption :
it caused serious disturbance in the money market, and both Cleveland
and Carlisle hastened to declare publicly that they would give gold for
the silver notes. They held that this was necessary to maintain the
parity of the notes. Their opponents said it indicated how much the
administration was under the heel of Wall Street speculators. April
17 the reserve passed below the $100,000,000 figure and dwindled
steadily as the exportation of gold continued. Meantime, the notes
issued in exchange for stored silver bullion were nearly $4,000,000 a
month. It was more and more evident that the law of 1890 ought
to be repealed. The mere hint of such a thing enraged those who
fervently hoped for more money. Cleveland gave little heed to
their violence. He was by temperament immovable before popular
clamor, and he now waited until it was evident that conservative
people realized the source of their danger ; and June 30 he called an
extra session of congress for August 7, 1893, to consider the currency.
A DECAPITATED HYDRA 755
Business distress was now acute. In June the New York clearing
house issued certificates in lieu of money. In the same month the
Erie railroad failed, and news came that India had demone-
tized silver. Bullion fell in one week from 75 to 61 cents *ep*^ of
-r A .the Sher-
an ounce. In August currency was at 3 per cent premium man Law
and banks would cash depositors' checks only for small
amounts. While these conditions were severest, the extra session be-
gan. Cleveland spoke plainly in his message, and the house by a
majority of 130, chiefly from the East and Middle West, passed a
repealing bill in three weeks. In the senate the friends of silver were
in the minority, but they filibustered in the hope of a compromise.
The senate eschewed closure, and the debate dragged along through
September and October. Continuous sessions were tried, but the
lusty champions of silver displayed more endurance than their adver-
saries expected, Allen, of Nebraska, speaking fourteen hours without
exhaustion. Finally on October 30 a vote was taken, and repeal was
carried by a majority of 43 to 32.
The Eastern papers were jubilant, and declared silver had "met its
Waterloo." They were too confident. Bland announced in the
house that the struggle would go on until free and un-
limited coinage was established, and in the senate the silver ?ittej JJ®el~
senators, headed by Teller, of Colorado, passed into open west,
opposition to their republican associates. The West and
the South, distressed by the panic, were exceedingly bitter. The
Sherman law had been to them in some sense a token of a compro-
mising spirit in their relations with the rest of the country, and they
considered its repeal an act of bad faith. Violent opponents charged
that Cleveland secured it in the interest of the speculators and shared
in the profits. There was not the slightest justification for the asser-
tion.
SELLING BONDS TO PROTECT THE SURPLUS
The repeal of the Sherman law only stopped the accumulation of
danger. Business stagnation continued, revenues were still inade-
quate, and it was necessary to throw the silver notes back
into circulation to meet the needs of government. The
premium on currency in August brought a quantity of
the metal to the country and the reserve went up to $103,683,000 ; but
under the drain of the time, it rapidly sank again, and October 19 it
was only $81,551,385, the lowest point since 1878. At the same time
the monthly deficit of the revenue was $7,000,000, and two months
later the reserve was $68,000,000. Up to this time there was little
evidence of hoarding, and the mischief chiefly came from failure of
revenue in connection with the redundant silver currency. But the
public was showing signs of uneasiness, and Carlisle asked congress to
allow him to borrow enough to tide over the deficiency of revenue.
756 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
To the democratic congressmen this was but a cry from Wall Street,
and they paid no heed.
The secretary then fell back on the resumption act of 1875, which
specified that he should sell bonds to maintain specie payment. The
Five Per ^ for which it: was made was long past, but he held that
Cent Bonds. ^ was in force until repealed, and January 17, 1894, he
offered $50,000,000 in 5 per cent bonds for gold. Loud
protests from the silver faction greeted the announcement, but he ig-
nored it. He was more concerned with the financial world, which
sent in bids for only one-fifth of the amount offered. He went to New
York, and with difficulty persuaded the banks to take the rest at 117!,
which was low for 5 per cents. Of the $58,660,000 in gold received in
the transaction $24,000,000 had been taken from the treasury within
a few days in exchange for notes. The net gain, $34,660,000, restored
the reserve to $107,000,000 on March 6, 1894, when it began at once
to fall again.
To the ordinary spring exportations of gold were now added other
sources of distress. The corn crop of 1894 failed, and Europe's wheat
crop was enormous, so that our exports were smaller than
Gow'with- usuaL 4* the same time the Wilson-Gorman bill disap-
drawals. pointed its creators and gave a deficit, for which the
failure of the income tax was not altogether responsible.
More than this, in the summer of 1894 Europe sold our securities
briskly and demanded gold in payment. Thus it happened that
when the reserve was depleted from that cause, and when it failed to
get the usual reenf orcement from the sale of the autumn crops abroad,
it was, on account of the deficit, necessary to use some of the precious
store in settlement of ordinary expenses of the government. By this
means the reserve was $52,000,000 on August 7 and in November
another bond issue of $50,000,000 was placed with a syndicate of bank-
ers. Half of the gold received was at once drawn back in exchange for
notes to take the place of that amount used in buying the bonds.
Depletion continued, and by February, 1895, the reserve was
$41,000,000, and the head of the New York sub-treasury reported
that he could maintain redemption hardly more than a day. The
situation seemed desperate, with another period of spring gold exporta-
tion ahead. In every large city financiers were making ready for a de-
preciated currency, and funds were being retained for use in the emer-
gency, when the news came that Cleveland had saved the situation.
Relief came through a contract with J. P. Morgan and Co. and the
Belmont firm, who represented the Rothschilds, of Paris, by
The Mor- which they took $62,000,000 thirty year four per cents
mont Agree- at IO4^> or at Par at three per cent if they were made payable
ment. in gold- The latter alternative needed the sanction of
congress , but in that quarter it met a stern refusal. In
the country at large the affair aroused much criticism. Four per
THE "ENDLESS CHAIN" 757
cents were selling about in and to place them now at 104^ seemed
absurd. Eventually the transaction netted the bankers a profit of
about thirteen points, more than seven millions. But Cleveland
justified it because of two conditions in the contract. By one the
bankers agreed to import half of the gold used in the purchase, and
by the other to use their best endeavors to prevent the withdrawal
of gold from the treasury during the pendency of the contract, a
period of six months. By sharing the loan and the profits involved
with the other New York banks they showed their ability to control
the demands on the treasury and the foreign gold delivered was not
immediately drawn out in what had come to be known as the " end-
less chain " process.
The effect of the contracts was to restore confidence. Commodity
prices rose and stock speculation revived so rapidly that it overdid
itself. In the end there was a sharp contraction which
turned the balance of trade against us and led to renewed
exportations of gold spite of the February agreement
with the bankers. Cleveland now offered $100,000,000 at four per
cent to the highest bidder. Partly because of returning confidence
and partly because of the great profit the bankers were believed to
have made on the preceding transaction, there was a wide popular
response. More than five times the amount offered was subscribed,
and it was all placed at from noj to 120. After that time no more
doubt was felt about the reserve.
The responsibility for the bond sales of 1895 must be shared by
several agents. The law creating the reserve did not give it a
special footing, but left it in the general fund so that it
was liable to be drawn on for expenses when the ordi-
nary revenue was inadequate. The McKinley tariff
created just such an emergency, and the treasury paid back for ex-
penses the notes received for gold, only to come back again in the
"endless chain." The democratic congress was partly responsible
because it failed to supply -adequate revenue and because it cham-
pioned silver so loudly that the feeling of apprehension was
increased among the people. Finally, Cleveland and Carlisle were
partly responsible because in the first place they showed hesita-
tion, asking congress to declare specifically that bonds might be
sold to maintain the reserve instead of assuming, as they did at last,
that the power existed under the act of 1875. The whole incident is a
painful episode in our history, but it came through a juxtaposition
of confusing factors which will probably not come again for many
years.
758 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
THE BRYAN CAMPAIGN FOR FREE SILVER, 1896
The events of 1895 destroyed the last shred of Cleveland's leader-
ship. Silver men in the West and South and machine politicians in
the East repudiated him, and the party was hopelessly
UiTo1*-* S divided. So fiercely was he denounced by democrats
laxity!"1 that the republicans no longer found it necessary to find
fault with him. The profits of the Morgan-Belmont
contract were supposed to be about $7, 000,000, and his enraged enemies
would not believe he did not share them. No serious man who knew
the situation entertained the suspicion.
The fall of Cleveland brought to supremacy the young democracy,
silver through and through. They saw with satisfaction the republi-
can tendency to espouse the gold standard and thought it
Democrats wou^d result in accessions from the silver republicans.
Organize.8 They began their campaign with remarkable energy and
devotion. March 4, 1895, they issued an address summon-
ing all friends of silver to united action in the coming election. The
call made a profound impression in the South and West, and the advo-
cates of sound money, as the other side called themselves, sought to
counteract it by calling a convention at Memphis, Tennessee. In
June a silver convention in the same city declared enthusiastically
for free and unlimited coinage of silver. To careful observers it was
evident that the sound money convention represented the business
men of the Southern and Western towns, while the silver convention
represented the much more numerous farming and laboring classes.
By the end of 1895 the silver movement was well organized and domi-
nated the democratic party everywhere but in the East, The people
of the East did not realize how powerful it had become.
At the nominating convention, Chicago, July 7, the silver men had
entire control and took precaution lest the suspected Eastern leaders
have the slightest opportunity to manipulate the con-
fc?Cont?o!n vention- The national committee suggested Hill, of
New York, for temporary chairman. The convention
set him aside for Daniels, of Virginia, a trusted silver man. Plat-
form committee, permanent chairman, credential committee, and every
other test of strength went to them. The platform itself was all they
wished, declaring for free and unlimited coinage of gold and silver at
the ratio of sixteen to one. It was adopted by a vote of 628 to 301,
and a motion to indorse Cleveland's administration was lost by a vote
of 564 to 357.
More important was the selection of a candidate. The silver forces
wanted a man who would not compromise with the in-
terests of. the East> and suspected all men mentioned for the
nomination, Blackburn, of Kentucky, McLean, of Ohio,
and Boies, of Iowa, all old-school democrats with groups of supporters.
WILLIAM JENNINGS BRYAN 759
They could not object on this score to Bland, of Missouri, who was also
urged ; but he was not a magnetic man, and for that reason they hesi-
tated to support him. Another man who had friends was William
Jennings Bryan, of Nebraska. In 1891 he appeared in congress, where
he attracted attention as a prominent young democrat. He spoke
well on the tariff and became identified with the free silver party. In
the preliminary work of the campaign of 1896 he was a favorite with
the West. In the struggle for the election of delegates from Ne-
braska to the convention he was defeated by J. Sterling Morton,
Cleveland's secretary of agriculture, but he came to Chicago at the
head of a contesting delegation which the convention promptly
seated.
To most of the delegates Bryan was unknown when on July 9 he
made a speech which sent the convention into raptures. The plat-
form committee had just reported and the speakers were
discussing it. First came Senator Tillman, of South convention
Carolina, in full possession of his faculties and speaking speech,
for the silver men. He shouted, gesticulated, and filled
the stifling air with abuse rather than argument. His friends
were not in an exacting mood, but they could feel nothing but disap-
pointment. Then rose Hill to speak for the East. He uttered short,
logical sentences in an icy and hopeless manner. He was no orator,
and the hostile audience barely tolerated him. Next came Governor
Russell, of Massachusetts, and Vilas, of Wisconsin. Both spoke well
for sound money, but the audience was in no mood to be pleased.
Then rose Bryan. His words came slowly, distinctly, and with cutting
force. Instantly the mass forgot its confusion, and the speech pro-
ceeded in profound stillness except for the outbursts of applause.
Russell had used the term " business men " in the narrow sense common
in the East. Bryan said : " You have made the definition of a business
man too limited in its application. The man who is employed for
wages is as much a business man as his employer. The attorney in
a country town is as much a business man as the corporation counsel
in a great metropolis. The merchant at the cross-roads store is as
much a business man as the merchant of New York. The farmer who
goes forth in the morning and toils all day — who begins in the spring
and toils all summer — and who, by the application of brain and
muscle to the natural resources of the country creates wealth, is as
much a business man as the man who goes upon the board of trade
and bets upon the price of grain. The miners who go down a thousand
feet into the earth, or climb two thousand feet upon the cliffs,
and bring forth from their hiding place the precious metals, to be
poured into the channels of trade, are as much business men as the
few financial magnates who, in a back room, corner the money
of the world. We come to speak for this broader class of business
760 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
These sentiments were the key of the Bryan movement. There
had been much talk about protecting the manufacturers and safe-
guarding the financial interests. Nobody talked about
Nominated. ^e sma^ business man, who had got the conviction that
he was ignored. Bryan pleaded his cause in words small
business men could understand. He knew little about finance, but
much about human nature. His Chicago speech delighted every sil-
ver man in the convention. It brought forth a mad wave of ap-
proval, and on the first ballot he received 119 votes for the nomina-
tion against 235 for Bland, the most prominent of the silver men. He
gained steadily on the second, third, and fourth ballots, and was nomi-
nated on the fifth by the necessary two-thirds majority. He was
thirty-six years old, a young leader of the young democracy. Arthur
Sewall, of Maine, a rich shipbuilder, was nominated for the vice-presi-
dency.
Three weeks earlier, June 16, the republican convention met at St.
Louis. The failure of the Wilson-Gorman law suggested the tariff
for chief issue and McKinley for candidate. He was a
Hanna and straightforward, serious man, a good campaigner, a tact-
McKinley. ^ an<^ popular politician, and a friend of protection. He
had a devoted supporter in Marcus A., or " Mark," Hanna,
a rich Cleveland iron-master and politician. Early in the cam-
paign Hanna determined that McKinley should be nominated, and set
out to accomplish his purpose with businesslike thoroughness. He
visited many parts of the country, and McKinley and protection was
a persuasive argument when urged by the millionaire politician from
the best protected city in the iron industry. The protected class
generally acquiesced, and many mere politicians followed them. His
quest for delegates was so successful that Hanna arrived at St. Louis
with his pocket full of votes. He was accustomed to control whatever
he touched, and his room now became the center of political activity.
Men who had long been chief party counsellors came to it to know
what was to be done.
One of the questions to be considered was the money plank in the
platform. The drift of the democrats to silver produced among the
republicans a similar movement toward gold. Hanna was
Plank personally.for gold : the men to whom he appealed were for
gold, but he dared not avow it too early lest it turn Western
delegates from McKinley. Before the convention assembled he ac-
cepted a gold plank suggested by a group of Western business men,
but he carefully concealed it. The Eastern men arrived keen for a
declaration for the gold standard. When Hanna finally
N0Cn5mited. let it: be known he was for gold, it seemed to the country
that he accepted it reluctantly and to please the East ; and
this paved the way to a reconciliation of many Western republicans to
the candidate. Thus Hanna steered his friend past the only serious
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY DIVIDED 761
difficulty in his way and got him nominated on the first ballot with
Garret A. Hobart, of New Jersey, for vice-president. At McKinley's
request Hanna was appointed chairman of the campaign committee.
Adopting the gold plank caused the secession of the extreme silver
republicans. As the vote was about to be taken Senator Teller,
of Colorado, rose and delivered a touching appeal. He
had been a republican from 1856 and had exerted much Withdrawal
influence in the party. His motion for free coinage at
sixteen to one was lost by a vote of 818 to 105. Then a
hush fell on the vast assemblage, as with 33 others he left the
hall in repudiation of the party. Among them were Senators Dubois,
of Idaho, Cannon, of Utah, and Pettigrew, of South Dakota. From
these three states and from Montana and Nevada came all the other
seceders.
Teller and his friends met in St. Louis, July 22, and organized the
" National Silver Party, " indorsing Bryan and Sewall. The people's
party at the same place and time indorsed Bryan, but in-
sisting on their own candidate for vice-president, selected ^dons °!
Thomas E. Watson, of Georgia. The prohibitionists
found themselves divided. One wing wanted to indorse silver and
several other aggressive policies. It took the name " National"
and nominated C. E. Bentley, of Nebraska, and J. H. Southgate,
of North Carolina. The other, using the old name, nominated
Joshua Levering, of Maryland, and Hale Johnson, of Illinois. The
gold democrats also formed a separate party, designed to please those
who would not break old party ties. It held a convention in Indianapolis
and nominated General John M. Palmer, a union veteran, and General
Simon B. Buckner, a confederate veteran. Spite of the many candi-
dates it was well recognized that the real fight was between McKinley
and Bryan.
The republicans liked a dignified campaign. It was Hanna's
idea for the candidate to remain at home and have delegation after
delegation come to him in token of respect and confidence.
McKinley's replies would be printed far and wide, and campaign,
would thus have great influence on the public. Bryan,
on the other hand, went to the people, to as many as he could reach, in
continuous railroad journeys during which he spoke many times a day
to throngs at railroad stations or in public halls. The vast crowds
that came to hear attested the popular interest. At first his opponents
scoffed, thinking it unbecoming for a presidential candidate to "drum
up" votes like a huckster seeking custom. But the earnestness and
effectiveness of his speeches gave to his canvass the fervor of a crusade,
and the scoffers were overwhelmed. The Bryan method of campaign-
ing became thenceforth a regular feature of party activity. Each side
spoke violently, the cultivated East vying with the plain-spoken
West in attributing the worst motives to its opponents. Even so
762 LAST PHASES OF THE SILVER MOVEMENT
cultured a journal as the Nation could see in the silver men nothing
but "a knot of silly, half- taught adventurers and anarchists."
The republicans began the campaign on the protection issue, which
favored the collection of large campaign contributions. Hanna was
The Issues suPPosed to have developed great skill in getting
them from manufacturers, money lenders, and the
great insurance companies. Pains were taken to convince the
workmen also. Protection, they were told, meant "a full dinner
pail." This argument also was very effective. While they talked
about the tariff the republicans would have been pleased to leave
silver in the background, had not Bryan's aggression made that im-
possible. As the campaign advanced they had to give the currency
question more and more attention. When nominated, McKinley's
record showed no hostility toward silver. He voted for the Sherman
purchase law as the best thing that could be done for silver at the time.
As the election approached, however, he gained courage to speak for
gold, and at the end of the campaign he was emphatic in defending
the money plank in his party's platform. Many of his party asso-
ciates were going through the same transformation.
Bryan expected to lose New England, Pennsylvania, and perhaps
New York and New Jersey, but he hoped that the workingmen and
M Kini farmers of the Middle West would carry that section, which
Elected.67 witn the S(?ut.n and- most of the distant West, would
make a majority. He was really helping to array one
section against another, and the result would depend on whether the
line of division was placed at the Appalachian mountain system
or at the Mississippi. Counting the ballots showed it was the latter.
He lost every state north of the Potomac and east of the Mississippi.
He also lost Iowa, Minnesota, California, Oregon, Kentucky, and
West Virginia. Wherever manufacturing or commercial interests were
strong, his support was weak. Two hundred and seventy-one elec-
toral votes were republican and 176 were democratic.
In his Chicago speech Senator Tillman said: "We of the South
have burned our bridges as far as the Northeastern democracy is
concerned, as now organized. We have turned our
Crushed? faces to tne West, asking our brethren of those states
to unite with us in restoring the government, the liberty
of our fathers, which our fathers left us." As describing existing
tendencies his words were true, spite of the jeers which greeted them
in some parts of the union. The young democracy was in rebellion
against New York leadership, which had become an offense to them
through Cleveland's tactless honesty and their own unmanageableness.
They were much in earnest, and the defeat of 1896 did not discourage
them. Their brilliant leader was unhorsed, but his sword was not
broken and their organization was intact. It was many years before
the Bryan movement was to relax its hold on the democratic party,
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE 763
and this was because it was a real movement, and not merely the
work of one man. Before Bryan appeared the army he was to direct
was formed. He gave it leadership, and he could not have disbanded
it in 1896 if he had so desired.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The general works, printed sources, and biographies for this chapter are the same
as for chapter XXXIV. General works on the currency are : Dewey, Financial
History of the United States (1903) ; Noyes, Forty Years of American Finance (1909) ;
White, Money and Banking (ed. 1902) ; and Lawson, American Finance (1906), an
English work.
On the free silver controversy see : Hepburn, History of Coinage and Currency in
the United Stats1: (1903), has a bibliography; Taussig, Silver Situation in the United
States (1893) ; Laughlin, Bimetallism in the United States (ed. 1897) ; and Watson,
History of American International Bimetallism (1896). Of the many reports of
conferences of the day see the following : Russell, International Monetary Confer-
ence (1898); The Monetary Commission of the Indianapolis Conference, Report
(1898) ; The First National Silver Convention, Proceedings (1889) ; and Report and
Hearings of Committee on Senate Silver Bill (Sen. Report, 51 cong., 2 ses., No. 3067).
See also the report of the International Monetary Conference (Sen. Ex. Docs. 52
cong. 2 ses., No. 28). A pamphlet of great interest is Harvey, Coin's Financial
School (1894).
On the political campaign of 1896 see : Dewey, National Problems (1907) ; Peck,
Twenty Years of the Republic (1907) ; Bryan, The First Battle (1897) ; Byars, Life
and Times of R. P. Bland (1900); Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years,
2 vols. (1903); White, Autobiography, 2 vols. (1905); Dingley, Life and Times of
Nelson Dingley, Jr. (1902) ; and McClure, Recollections of Half a Century (1902).
See also: Stan wood, History of the Presidency (1898); Reynolds, National Plat-
forms and Political History (1898) ; Woodburn, Political Parties and Party Prob-
lems (1903) ; and Curtis, The Republican Party, 2 vols. (1904).
The periodical literature of the day is very valuable. Among the best monthlies
and weeklies are: The American Review of Reviews; The Forum; The Atlantic
Monthly; The Nation; The Independent; Public Opinion, a valuable digest; and
Sound Currency, pamphlets issued serially by the New York Reform Club. See also
The Political Science Quarterly and The Annals of the American Academy.
For Independent Reading
McChire, Recollections of Half a Century (1902); Whittle, President Cleveland
,1896), Harvey, Coin's Financial School (1894); Bryan, The First Battle (1897);
White, Money and Banking (1902) ; and Hoar, Autobiography of Seventy Years,
2 Vols. (1903).
CHAPTER XXXVII
A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
IMPORTANCE OF THE PACIFIC
THE Pacific shares and islands, for centuries given up to barbarism or to
the quiet oriental culture, have recently become the scene of very in-
teresting events. Barbarism has retreated, and the oriental
tif W Era *s Decomm§ a vigorous competitor of occidental peoples.
Pacific*' The United States became concerned with this process
of development soon after they acquired California.
England, France, Germany, and Russia have also been interested in
the same quarter; and so it has happened that in recent years the
Pacific has been the theater of weighty diplomatic affairs. Commerce
and territorial expansion have been the ruling motives of the diplomats.
Our early policy of non-interference applied to the Old World, and
was adopted through necessity. We could not hope to have weight
in settling Europe's problems, nor was it expedient to become entangled
in its politics. But in the Pacific it was otherwise. We had both
territorial and commercial interests there, and it was wise to take in
that ocean the position of a strong power so that other nations,
civilized and uncivilized, should respect us. To maintain this posi-
tion in the Pacific and to keep somewhat the same influence among
the states south of us have been the chief objects of our post-bellum
diplomacy.
The change came about slowly. Men of the old school clung
through sentiment to the ideal of non-intervention, they were appalled
by the expense of a navy great enough to maintain a leading
s ?eT f Position among the other American states and on the
American Pacific, they feared that a strong foreign policy would
Diplomacy, promote militarism, and it was pointed out that the con-
stitution made no provision for the rule of dependencies.
But the march of events was against them. The aggressive attitude
of Blaine, secretary of state in 1881, and in 1889-1892, brought the
new school into prominence, Cleveland's extension of the Monroe
doctrine in the Venezuelan boundary incident of 1895 gave it a wide
popular support, and Dewey's victory at Manila crowned it with
the sanctity of national glory. Thus the old school lost control,
and Americans came to feel at the close of the century that they must
of necessity take up a new burden in the Western hemisphere and in
the Orient.
764
THE CONTROL OF SAMOA 765
THE SAMOAN INCIDENT, 1887-1889
The beginning of the change was in the negotiations relative to the
Samoan islands, whose combined area is a little larger than that of
Rhode Island. They are situated on the direct route
from San Francisco to Sidney, Australia, 4700 miles from samoa°f
the former, 2000 from the latter, and 2600 south of Hono-
lulu. German traders established themselves there as early as 1854,
and Americans and Englishmen did the same later. The natives
were frequently at war among themselves, and in 1877 offered the is-
lands to the United States. Conservatism was still dominant in our
foreign policy, and the offer was refused. But we made a treaty
(1878) by which we got a coaling station, Pago-Pago, and promised to
protect Samoa, if we could, from the aggression of other .
nations. Next year Samoa made a similar treaty with controversy*
England and a still more generous one with Germany.
This triple guaranty of integrity did not give peace to the islands ;
for Germany's more favorable terms, together with her recognized
policy of aggression, led the two other nations to join issues against
her. The quarrel reached a critical stage when a native claimant to
the throne appeared with German support and began a war against the
ruling house. Finally, April, 1886, three German warships arrived
on the scene, saluted the German claimant, and seemed bent on es-
tablishing his power. The American consul, mindful of the treaty
of 1878, proclaimed an American protectorate, and the British inter-
ests supported him.
The situation now demanded the intervention of diplomacy, and
three commissioners, American, British, and German, respectively,
went to the islands to investigate. They reported unani-
mously that the natives were incapable of ruling the islands
and that a joint control of the three powers should be es- Bayard.
tablished. Then Bayard, American secretary of state, and
the British and German ministers in Washington, met (June, 1887)
to dispose of the matter. It was singular that our first step in the
stronger policy in the Pacific should have been taken by Bayard,
ordinarily an exponent of the old school and a democrat. Samoa
had little but geographical value to us and it had not that unless
we proposed to extend our influence throughout the Pacific ocean.
In the conference at Washington Germany proposed that foreign in-
terests in Samoa be placed under a regent representing the nation
having the strongest interest there. Had Bayard been for the old
policy he would have accepted. But he held out for a joint regency
in which we should have as much influence as either Britain or Ger-
many, and the conference adjourned, the question remaining for the
time in statu quo.
766 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
Before the diplomats reassembled, confusion was precipitated in
Samoa by the German consul there. Throwing aside restraints he
deposed the native king, set up his own favorite, and
Pretensions with the aid of four warships had his way for nearly a year.
Germans in ^e f°ll°wers °f the old king at last began a counter-
Samoa, revolution with the sympathy of the Americans and
British. In the war which followed the Germans took
open part. One incident especially showed how much they felt them-
selves masters of the country. They sent the ship Adler to shell a
village which supported the old ruler. As it leisurely took position
to do its mission, the commander was astonished to see the American
cruiser Adams anchor in the line of fire with guns and crew ready to
reply. Leary, the commander of the Adams, an adventurous Irish-
man, was willing to bring on war to oppose the Germans; and the
Adler' s commander, not prepared to go that far, sailed back to Apia,
where the German consul proclaimed martial law to apply to foreigners
and natives.
The year 1889 opened with every prospect of war. All that hap-
pened in the Southern Pacific aroused warm interest in the United
States, and the nation no longer thought of the value of
at Apia*™ the Samoan islands, but of the honor of the flag. Early
in March, as Harrison assumed the presidency, the United
States ship Trenton entered Apia harbor, where were anchored two
other American, three German, and one British, men-of-war, all ready
for action and likely to begin it at the slightest provocation. The
threatened engagement was averted by a stupendous accident of
nature. March 16 a great hurricane swept over the scene, tossing
on the beach the shipping in the exposed roadway, and cooling the
passions of the hour. Of the bristling warships only one survived,
the British Calliope, which with the greatest difficulty managed to
steam out to sea when the storm was highest.
Negotiations were now resumed, and April 29 a joint commission
of the three powers met in Berlin under the presidency of Bismarck to
consider the matter. Germany gave up her plans of
absorption, and it was determined to continue the in-
tegrity of the islands with a joint protectorate under
the three nations. But experience showed that such an arrangement
was unsatisfactory, and in 1900, when our sphere of influence in the
Pacific was more clearly outlined, a further decision was reached.
It was now agreed that Great Britain should withdraw from the
islands, that the United States should have the island of Tutuila,
with the excellent harbor of Pago-Pago, and that the remainder of the
group of islands should go to Germany. On this basis the Samoan
question was at last settled.
A DIPLOMATIC DEFEAT 767
THE FUR SEAL CONTROVERSY
While the Samoan incident drew public attention to the South
Pacific another controversy had its seat in the north of the same ocean.
By a construction of our right to Alaska, derived through
Russian sources, we believed that the Bering sea was
mare clausum and that we could control sealing there.
Other nations protested our claim, especially England, whose Canadian
sealers were numerous. After due notice of their rights the United
States began to seize intruders in the sea, and March 2, 1889, congress
prohibited the promiscuous killing of seals there. As most of the
captured English ships were taken over three miles from land England
demanded reparation for damages. The two nations seemed thus
diametrically opposed on an important point; the press of each
breathed defiance ; and some imprudent despatches of Secretary Blaine
added to the seriousness of the situation. But no one wished war over
so small a matter, and after a period of reflection the matter was sub-
mitted to arbitration in 1892. The next year a tribunal
met in Paris and decided : (a) that the Bering sea was
not mare clausum and that we had no property rights l8_2
in seals outside of the three-mile limits ; (b) that we should
pay damages arising from the seizure of ships contrary to this rule ;
and (c) that a series of regulations now made should govern seal fish-
eries in the future. Thus we lost on the first and second points, the
essence of the controversy. It was due to the aggressive position
taken by Blaine, who was apt to make wide claims in behalf of his
own side. Neither he nor his associates were as well informed in the
principles of international law as they should have been ; or they would
hardly have claimed that the position of the Aleutian islands, Ameri-
can property as they were, gave to the United States the great sea
between those islands and the mainland of Alaska. The failure in
this respect humiliated American pride, and taught us that we must be
well informed and moderate in our assertions if we play the part of a
great power in the world's diplomacy.
THE MAFIA INCIDENT
This affair was, strictly speaking, a part of local history, and deserves
no more mention in a general history than any other of many lawless
outbreaks which have occurred in various parts of our
country. But some of its victims were aliens, and it led, Crime fa
through that fact, to serious international consequences. Orleans.
Bad in its origin, it was conducted in its diplomatic stage
with skill and tactfulness. In 1891 New Orleans had been the scene
of many black-hand outrages, believed to have been due to the Mafia
768 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
society, a well-known Italian organization. At length the chief of-
police, Hennessy, very active in hunting down the perpetrators,
was murdered in a peculiarly brutal and defiant manner, and circum-
stances fixed the guilt on Italians. Nine of them were brought to
trial, and the evidence against them was strong. But after a long and
exciting trial six of the accused were acquitted and the jury disagreed
as to the others. All the acquitted men were detained in prison on
other charges. Public opinion was shocked. It was believed that
bribery had been at work, and the prominent men of the city felt that
a band of foreign cut-throats held the lives and property
the Mob° °^ resPectable citizens at their disposal. March 15, 1891,
while excitement was highest, a mass-meeting was called
to protest. A vast crowd assembled, inflammatory speeches were
made, and a determined mob, armed and without disguise, marched
to the prison. They forced an entrance, hunted out the Italian
prisoners, shot down eleven without mercy, and went to their homes
without molestation. They made no demonstration against the
jury and attorneys, who, if bribery had been practiced, must have
been equally guilty with the prisoners. The whole city approved
the lynching, and the participants, though well known, were not
arrested.
The Italian people were highly outraged, and the government
demanded that the lynchers be punished and indemnity be paid. The
duality of our form of government, from which proceeds bad, as
well as good, results, now came into prominence. The federal govern-
ment alone could deal with Italy in the matter, but it could not
deal with the New Orleans mob, which had not violated federal law.
Secretary Elaine explained the situation to Baron Fava, Italian minis-
ter in Washington, while he urged the governor of Louisiana to bring
the mob leaders to trial. He well knew the governor was not likely
to comply. To Italy it seemed that we trifled with her offended dig-
nity ; Baron Fava made a warm protest, Blaine sent him a sharp
reply, and the upshot was that Italy withdrew her representative from
a government in which the lives of Italian subjects seemed to be held
of slight value. But reflection brought moderation. Investigation
showed that all but three of the victims at New Orleans were natu-
ralized Americans, and congress voted $25,000 to be divided among
the families of the three. Italy considered this satisfactory reparation,
and cordial relations were resumed a year after they were suspended.
RELATIONS WITH CHILE
To understand the Chilean incident of 1891 we must go back to 1886,
when Balmeceda began a five-year term as president of the republic.
He was a grasping man who wished to increase his private fortune at
the expense of the public. He was supposed to have his eyes on
BALMECEDA'S DICTATORSHIP 769
the government's nitrate beds and to expect to gain his object
through a cabinet composed of his own creatures. Congress passed a
vote of censure. Then the cabinet should have resigned,
but he maintained them in office, and a fierce wrangle ensued fh? R«v°-
between the executive and the legislature. He sought to c^m "
collect taxes without authority, and in January, 1891,
boldly proclaimed himself dictator. He had the army on his side,
beat down opposition, dissolved congress, and elected another to his
liking. For a moment he seemed entirely successful, but the Northern
provinces broke from his grasp and began a war in which they slowly
and steadily decreased his power. They won most of the navy, and
blockaded and finally took all the long seacoast. August 7, 1891,
they defeated the Balmecedists, entered Santiago, the capital, and
reigned supreme in the country. They were so much embittered
that many of the defeated leaders killed themselves rather than be
taken prisoners.
This happened while Elaine was secretary of state. He was un-
popular in Chile, because in 1881, when he was in Garfield's cabinet, he
forbade that nation to make a treaty with Peru until certain American
claims were settled. Chileans are very sensitive of their national
honor, and they have good memories. When the war of 1891 began
the United States supported the existing government. Their minister,
Patrick Eagan, an exiled Irish agitator and a political subordinate of
Elaine, was notably warm for Balmeceda. The congressionalists
believed that he was corrupted and that Elaine shared the guilt. In
America the cause of the revolutionists was popular, and Elaine and
Eagan were sharply criticized. Elaine was especially denounced
because he would not accord belligerent rights to the revolutionists
even when the navy was in their hands.
At this stage came the affair of the Itata. In May the insurgents
sent this ship to San Diego, California, for military supplies. This
was not against the law of neutrality, but the ship was Thc /ftrta
detained by a United States marshal, to the great disap-
pointment of her own party and their American friends. Her com-
mander would not brook the delay, and rashly sailed away after cutting
his cables and overpowering the American officers in charge of the
vessel. It was an act of defiance, and the whole American nation,
irrespective of previous opinions, denounced it; and the cruiser
Charleston was sent out to recapture the Itata, by force if necessary.
The Chilean revolutionists were also aroused and sent the Esmeralda,
equally strong as the Charleston, to protect the fugitive. For several
days the Esmeralda and the Charleston, both ready for action, lay in
the Mexican harbor of Acapulco, awaiting the Itata, whose ap-
pearance must have precipitated war. Fortunately her commander
sailed straight for Chile. When she arrived the anger of the revolu-
tionists had cooled and she was handed back to the American authori-
770 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
ties. The matter then went to an American court which ordered the
Itata released on the ground that her detention was unwarranted.
The affair left a bad impression of American feeling in the minds of
the revolutionists.
It was heightened early in August by another apparent violation
of neutrality. The insurgents were now prepared for their final blow.
They sailed out of their northern provinces with a fleet
I^f°"n^ion of transports and landed an army at a point above Val-
surgent " paraiso, hoping to surprise Santiago by a quick overland
Movements, march. Their movements were observed by the officer
commanding the American squadron in Chilean waters,
who repaired at once to Valparaiso and communicated the intelligence
to Washington in cipher. He cautioned the subordinate who went
ashore with the dispatch to say nothing of the movement of the insur-
gents ; but the information got into circulation immediately, and
the Valparaiso papers in repeating it said it was acquired from the
Americans. No amount of denial could convince the revolutionists,
now successful in their attack on their enemies, that the United States
officer had not been in this respect the active friend of Balmeceda.
Thus the new Chilean administration was embittered toward our
government.
The leaders of the defeated party, not daring to surrender to the
victors, took refuge in the foreign legations in Santiago, eighty in
that of the United States, about the same number in that
Asylum of Spain, and sixteen distributed among those of Brazil,
Baime^ed *° G€rmany> France, and Great Britain. In six weeks all
cedists. but twenty-one had been allowed to escape, fifteen of
whom were under American protection ; and these, per-
sons of great prominence in the recent struggle, were much desired
for punishment. The right of asylum in countries subject to frequent
revolutions has long been recognized by civilized nations, but the
United States had looked on it with disfavor, and their agents were
instructed to extend it only temporarily to save life, and they were
not to "harbor offenders against the laws from the pursuit of the
legitimate agents of justice." Eagan seems to have gone beyond
these instructions. The new government dared not violate the lega-
tions, but policed the surrounding areas most carefully, even to the
very thresholds of the buildings. The situation was irritating, and
lasted until in January, 1892, seven fugitives, all who had not escaped,
were escorted to the seashore by the foreign ministers, and sent into
safe exile aboard foreign warships.
By this series of events Chilean feeling against the United States
became most vehement. The result was the attack on the sailors
of the Baltimore by a Valparaiso mob, October 16, 1892. Captain
Schley, in command, unwisely allowed 117 of his crew shore leave.
Some of them went to the worst part of the city, visited saloons and
A BLUNDERING MINISTER 771
dance halls, and fell to quarreling with the natives. Thus began a
street battle of an hour's duration, in which two Americans were killed
and nineteen wounded. The police passed through the
crowd, ostensibly to disperse it, but the Americans present J *
testified that they joined in the attack on the sailors,
This the Chileans denied, and the point was not clearly
determined in the investigations which followed, one at Mare Island
and the other by Chile at Valparaiso.
The outbreak caused indignation in America. The Chilean foreign
minister, filled with the bitterness of recent events, seems to have
regarded it complacently. At the end of ten days he had
expressed no regret, and when his attention was cour-
teously called to the fact he gave such an ill-natured reply
that Minister Eagan was ordered to suspend intercourse.
Two months later a new foreign minister was in office, and Chile
appeared more reasonable. Her first step was to ask for the recall of
Eagan as persona non grata. Elaine replied that when Chile apologized
and made reparation for the riot of October 16, and withdrew the
offensive note of the preceding foreign secretary, he would entertain
the request for Eagan 's recall. The reply to this note conceded all
that was demanded, and deferred the recall of Eagan. Six months
later Chile handed over $75,000 for the victims of the riot. As the
advent of Cleveland's administration had now disposed of Eagan,
no other cause of irritation existed between the two powers. The
Chilean incident arose through the conduct of an incompetent minis-
ter, but its permanent effect was to increase the prestige of the
United States in South America, and to impress on our own citizens
the significance of a broader foreign policy.
HAWAIIAN ANNEXATION
The Hawaiian islands, discovered probably at the close of the
fifteenth century, did not arouse the interests of men until they were
rediscovered late in the eighteenth. In 1788 two Boston
ships visited them, then went to the northwest to buy
furs from the natives, returned in the winter to dry and
cure their furs, visited the Northwest for other skins the following
season, and finally sold the entire cargo in Canton and returned to
Boston with oriental stuffs, making a profit of 1000 per cent on the
operations of the two years. Their adventure found many imitators,
and -by 1800 Honolulu was a base for the operation of many traders
in the northern ocean. It had a group of white resident merchants
and adventurers, American and European.
In 1820 American missionaries arrived. The docile natives proved
easy converts, and schools, knowledge of letters, and a simple native
literature soon followed. The missionaries became advisers of the
772 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
kings, and used their influence for progress and good order. For-
eigners were welcomed, and large sugar plantations were estab-
lished successfully in this rich agricultural region. In
theMiss/on- ^^ England and France recognized the independence of
arils. 1S " Hawaii, and the United States did the same actually, but
not formally, because of her old policy of avoiding en-
tangling alliances. By this means the islands preserved their inde-
pendence. After California was settled, Hawaii became more im-
portant through our growing interest in the Pacific and
of 1876?* because it furnished food products to the new community.
In 1876 we made a treaty with the islands by which
custom duties were mutually relinquished, and it was agreed that
Hawaii should not pass into the power of any other foreign nation.
It was followed by a wide extension of American industry there, and
all this seemed to make annexation more probable.
For many years the native kings, advised by the missionaries, ruled
well. They gave the people written constitutions, each more liberal
than its predecessor (1839, 1864, and 1887). The last
- came in the reign of Kalakaua (l873~l891)) whose private
tion, 1893." morals were bad and who late in life yielded to designing
white favorites until the chief business interests, largely
American, combined to force him to grant reforms. They succeeded
in overriding his weak will, and the result was the constitution of
1887, giving the suffrage to the whites and recognizing cabinet respon-
sibility. Kalakaua resented it but was powerless, for the natives
were worthless as soldiers. In 1891 he was succeeded by Liliuokalani,
his sister. She hated the constitution of 1887, and, with more spirit
than her brother, determined to overthrow it. To be independent of
the legislature she established a lottery and an opium monopoly,
and announced in 1893 that she would promulgate a new constitu-
tion. The news alarmed the whites, who believed she would deprive
them of a voice in government and take the taxing power into her own
hands. The wealthy natives had the same interest as the rich white
men, and supported the armed protest which now appeared against
the proposed change. It was evident that a fierce struggle was im-
minent, and the American minister landed marines to protect the
legation. The natives took this to mean that the United States sup-
ported the protesting party, and when the queen called on her troops
to defend her prerogative, they refused to fight. Her advisers, white
adventurers for the most part, now urged her to abdicate. More
spirited than they, she refused for a time, but finally complied when
she realized that she stood entirely alone.
This affair occurred January 16, 1893. The revolutionists organized
a provisional government having republican forms, with S. B. Dole
president. It was recognized by the United States, England, Ger-
many, and France, and it immediately appointed commissioners to
OPPOSITION TO EXPANSION 773
secure American annexation. For a time all went well in Hawaii.
But annexation pleased only the Americans there. The other
whites, and many natives, headed by the British contin-
gent, began to prepare a counter-revolution. Dole knew
their plans, and got Stevens, the American minister, to raise Flag<
the American flag ; and on February i, 1893, marines from
the Boston landed in Honolulu and patroled the streets. Stevens
acted on his own responsibility. He thought the moment critical,
and did not dream that his countrymen would hesitate to accept the
fine group of islands which fortune offered them.
President Harrison received the Hawaiian commissioners three
weeks before the end of his administration, and a treaty was prepared
and sent at once to the senate. It provided for annexa-
tion, with an annual pension of $20,000 for the queen and Annexation
a gift of $150,000 for her daughter, the heir apparent to the
throne, if they would accept the revolution. By this time public
opinion was greatly aroused. Many people did not like the part the
marines took in the revolution and many did not want distant terri-
tory at any price. To the latter the treaty was the beginning of a
policy of expansion leading no one knew where, necessitating a great
navy at an enormous expense, and elevating military ideals to the
center of American policies. The opposition was strong enough
to postpone ratification until the beginning of the new presi-
dency. They were supported by the fact that President Cleveland
was known to favor delay. One of his first steps after his inaug-
uration was to withdraw the treaty from the senate and to send
James H. Blount, special commissioner, to investigate the situation
in Hawaii.
In Honolulu, Blount began by ordering the American flag hauled
down. Then he heard evidence from each side, and in July, 1893,
reported that the revolution of the preceding January was
accomplished chiefly through the connivance of the Ameri-
can minister and the overawing presence of the American
marines. On this basis the president decided that it was
our duty to abandon our pretension to supremacy and to express to
the queen regret for the conduct of Minister Stevens. This he pro-
ceeded to carry out, inducing the queen, but with much difficulty, to
promise amnesty to the revolutionists when she regained her power.
Cleveland also wished to restore her to the throne by force, but
congress would not go that far. May 31, 1894, it passed the Turpie
resolution, refusing to interfere further in Hawaii. Liliuokalani was
not able to effect her restoration in face of the revolutionists, and the
Hawaiian republic continued to have authority in the islands until
1898. In 1895 there was a futile plot in her behalf, and she was
arrested and forced to swear allegiance to the republic.
The advent of the republicans to power with the election of McKin-
774 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
ley in 1896, brought up Hawaiian annexation again. A new treaty
was prepared for the purpose and sent to the senate in
Annexation 1897, but the opposition of the democrats prevented its
pushed" acceptance by the necessary two-thirds majority. Its
1898. ' advocates then resorted to a joint resolution, as in the
case of Texas. Before this measure came to a vote the
Spanish war began, and Dewey's victory at Manila made Hawaii of
vast importance. The resolution now passed the house by a vote of
209 to 91 and the senate by 42 to 21. It made Hawaii "a part of the
territory of the United States," but forbade its Chinese inhabitants
to come to continental United States, and left the islands outside of
the customs limits. In 1900 another act created the territory of
Hawaii, with the usual territorial government.
The creation of a Hawaiian territory is justified on the ground that
it is destined to become a white man's country. From its first ex-
ploitation by Europeans the natives proved themselves unsatisfactory
laborers, and contact with civilization has involved a decrease in their
numbers. They were 130,313 in 1832, 44,088 in 1878, only 34,436
in 1800, and 29,834, in 1900. It seems probable that they will finally
disappear. Their places have been taken by Portuguese, Chinese,
Japanese, Koreans, and Spaniards from Malaga. Annexation ter-
minated the importation of Chinese laborers. Then began the immi-
gration of Japanese, but in 1906 Japan, desiring to turn her emigrants
to Korea, made such restrictions that her own people ceased to go to
Hawaii. The Chinese there show a disposition to intermarry with
the natives, and are generally considered a desirable addition to the
population. In. 1908 they were estimated at 10.6 per cent of the entire
population, while the Japanese were 40.2 per cent. At the same time
the Teutonic element, including the native whites, were 12,000, or 7
per cent. By this it is seen that the whites constitute a rich and rela-
tively small ruling class over a large body of dependents.
CHINESE IMMIGRATION
Chinese laborers began to come to California soon after 1849, and
they were welcomed there at a time when laborers were exceedingly
few. The Burlingame treaty, 1868, facilitated this by
Chinese0* granting Chinese residents in America all the privileges of
Laborers. citizens of the most favored nation. White laborers,
arriving in numbers after the completion of the trans-
continental railroads, complained of the orientals, who worked long
hours and at low wages. Many acts of violence ensued, and in 1871
San Francisco had a riot, in which 21 Chinamen were killed. The
matter was brought into politics, and each party locally declared against
unrestricted Chinese immigration. In 1877 a committee appointed by
the United States senate investigated the situation and reported that
EARLY SYMPATHY FOR JAPAN 775
the Burlingame treaty should be modified. Nothing was done, how-
ever, and in the same year began a series of outrages incited by Dennis
Kearney, an agitator, the burden of whose song was that the Chinese
must go. He found support among the lower classes, and for many
months was a source of annoyance to the city authorities. The state
legislature passed several restrictions for the orientals, limiting their
rights of labor and residence, but the federal courts declared
most of them unconstitutional. The matter then went ^^ion
to congress, which passed a bill restricting immigration, pushed",
but Hayes vetoed it because it infringed the treaty and ex-
posed to retaliation Americans resident in China. At the same time
negotiations were opened by which China agreed that the influx of
laborers might be mutually forbidden, but not that of students,
travelers, teachers, or merchants. This made possible the act of
1882, by which laborers were denied admission to the country for ten
years. The execution of the law was difficult. Laborers were
smuggled in under pretense that they were of the excepted classes,
and other legislation was necessary to make the exclusion law effective.
In 1892 a new act, the Geary law, extended all these restrictions for
ten years more. In 1902 it was ordered that they should be extended
indefinitely. The undeveloped condition of China has led that nation
to accept discriminations which a more powerful state would probably
find insupportable.
AMERICA AND JAPAN
The feeling against Chinese labor did not extend to the Japanese,
partly because immigration from that quarter was not numerous, and
partly from the part Perry took (1853) in opening the
island kingdom to the world. Japan was a strong power,
and progressed so rapidly in new ideas that in 1872 it sent
a commission to Europe and America to get the powers to relinquish
rights of extra- territorial] ty in Japan. The powers would not con-
sent, and the commissioners went home to urge further progress in
occidentalism. In the United States they encountered Joseph Hardy
Neesima, who as a boy escaped out of Japan on a Boston
ship and had been educated in Amherst College. He was Jjeesiina
a man of great capacity, and the commissioners called him
back to his country to supervise the system of education. Many
Japanese students now came to America for instruction, and Ameri-
can missionaries went in large numbers to Japan. In 1894-1895,
Japan fought a successful war with China, demonstrating her pre-
dominance among the orientals. It was not possible to deny her all
the rights of a first-class state. The concession she was denied in
1872 was granted in 1899, when extra-territorial courts were abolished
within her borders, and her alliance was sought by the nations having
strongest interests in the East.
776 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
Japan's rapid rise in fortune brought some embarrassment to the
other nations concerned in the orient. The partition of China had
long been a fixed idea in the world of diplomacy, but who
could now believe this great new state would passively
Japan allow such a thing under her very nose? Developing
Eastern trade had also been a favored hope of America
and Europe, but Japan's industrial energy was as great as her mili-
tary energy, and her geographical position as well as her cheap labor
gave her an immense advantage in a competition in that field. De-
cidedly, the arrival of the nation at the state of a great power seriously
disarranged the plans of other great states, and it created a feeling
of fear and uncertainty among them. The United States felt the
same apprehension, not because they cared about the division of
China, but because they thought of the exposed position of the
Philippines and feared to lose their expanding oriental trade. It
must be confessed that Japan aided the growth of distrust partly by a
natural but rather offensive national self-confidence, and partly
because she had shown a willingness to use expedients not ordinarily
considered fair dealing in international relations. Through these
means disappeared the early American enthusiasm for Japan. A
counterfeeling of mild distrust was created, also, in Japanese minds
by Roosevelt's alleged favor to Russia in the treaty of Portsmouth.
The an ti- Japanese feeling has been strongest on the Pacific coast,
where the question, going beyond the general feeling just described,
is part of the local opposition to orientals. In 1900 there
^^?rma were in this region 18,269 Japanese, which was only .007
Japanese. Per cent °^ tne entire population, while there were three
times as many Chinamen. But after that year immigra-
tion increased. In 1903 the arrivals were 6000, and the coast became
alarmed. It thought that the "yellow peril" had appeared in a new
form. Much was said to excite popular feeling, and in 1906 the San
Francisco school board ordered that Japanese be taught in an "ori-
ental school," and not, as before, in the regular schools. It was
alleged in support of the order that the Japanese "school children"
were really adults and should not be in schools with young white
children.
The incident excited the people of Japan, who resented the dis-
crimination. The opposition there denounced the Japanese govern-
ment for tolerating what it pronounced an insult to the
^h® Adjust- national honor, and there was danger that popular feel-
J£o7.° ing would make war inevitable. The government at
Tokio wished to avoid war, and urged President Roosevelt
to execute the treaty by which Japanese citizens in the United States
were guaranteed the rights of the most favored nation. The presi-
dent wished to comply, but the dual nature of political authority in
our system of government made it difficult to do so. He sent the
VENEZUELA AND BRITISH GUIANA 777
secretary of the interior to investigate the California situation, who
reported that there were only 93 Japanese in the San Francisco schools,
very few of whom were over twenty years old. Suits were now ordered
to enforce the rights of the Japanese pupils under the treaty, and the
president's annual message announced a firm purpose to carry the
affair through. In California opinion was defiant. A mob even in-
sulted a group of Japanese scientists observing the effects of the San
Francisco earthquake, although Japan's contribution of $246,000 to
relieve the suffering from that calamity was $33,000 more than the
amount received from all other foreign nations. The California state
authorities were less rash, and an adjustment was made in 1907.
Japan agreed to execute more strictly a law already enacted forbidding
the emigration of laborers, and San Francisco agreed to admit to the
schools Japanese children not over sixteen years of age. Since then
an excitable press has found several occasions to raise a Japanese
war scare, but calmer minds have been at the seats of authority in
Tokio and Washington.
THE VENEZUELA BOUNDARY DISPUTE
Venezuela revolted from Spain in 1810 and established jurisdiction
over the valley of the Orinoco. In 1814 England acquired British
Guiana from Holland by a treaty which left the western
limits undefined. Venezuela asked several times for joint ^"^5°
action to settle the boundary, but the requests were not
granted. In 1841, however, England sent Schomburgk, a surveyor,
to run the line with such data as she had from Holland. He carried
it far westward, and included 50,000 square miles that Venezuela
claimed, practically extending British Guiana to the Orinoco. To
Venezuela's protest Britain replied with an offer to leave the former
a narrow strip on the east bank of the Orinoco, so that the mouth of
that river should be entirely Venezuelan. The offer was not accepted,
and for thirty-two years the controversy slept. Meanwhile many
British subjects settled in the disputed area, some of them coming
to prospect for gold which was discovered there. Venezuela, there-
fore, in 1876, again asked England to take steps to settle the bound-
ary. No reply was vouchsafed until 1880, when England announced
that she claimed through some Dutch treaties with the aborigines a
large area west of the Schomburgk line. In this stage the contro-
versy could not be compromised by the parties, and Venezuela asked
England to submit to arbitration. The response was a negative, and
though the request was several times repeated in the next six years
no other reply was given. Finally, in 1886, England announced once
for all that she would not recognize Venezuelan pretensions east of
the Schomburgk line. Rupture of intercourse followed, and war
might have begun had the parties been equally strong. In 1890 and
778 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
in 1893 Venezuela sought to reopen negotiations, but met with un-
yielding opposition. Her attitude, aside from a consideration of her
right, was not such as she would have taken in dealing with a great
power. A revolted Spanish province was apt to have indefinite limits,
due to the large areas of unsettled territory, and it is by no means
sure that Venezuela originally had title to the region in dispute. But
to people who knew nothing of the merits of the case it seemed that
the government at London used its strength to bully a weaker power
and refused to arbitrate because its cause was weak.
In 1876 Venezuela asked the United States to aid her, alleging that
she was otherwise powerless to prevent the apparent British aggres-
sions. But President Grant would do no more than hint
Venezuela to England that we considered ourselves interested in the
tt?ePUnited situation- Nothing resulted, and in 1887 (Cleveland now
States. being president) the United States went further and
offered its services to secure arbitration if agreeable to
both parties. Venezuela had then just broken off intercourse,
and England replied that the attitude of the South American state
was such that arbitration was impossible, and the same answer was
made when Harrison in 1890 made a similar request. All our pro-
tests to England had been made at the suggestion of Venezuela, who
continually urged her defenceless position against a mighty nation
and declared she would never have justice until the United States
took action.
These appeals might well arouse American sympathy, but inter-
ference in the quarrel ought to be based on important interests at
stake, and these, it was thought, were of two kinds:
Our i . Our prestige with the Spanish American states demanded
Grounds for ^ we • Venezuela the protection she needed. 2. The
Intener- .., °, . , , *• , .-, -n^-L
ence. Monroe doctrine had some bearing on the case. Both
reasons had weight with the American president, but the
latter was placed most in prominence. As stated in 1823, the Monroe
doctrine announced that a European state was not to plant colonies
in South America or to oppress or control any of the states already
established there. It was issued in our own interests, for we feared
that if a great power were fixed in the continent south of us our own
institutions would be imperiled. In this sense the doctrine was a dead
letter in 1895. Practical men so regarded it, and the British ministry
had no idea that it could be applied to the Venezuelan situation. But
Cleveland thought otherwise. In some things he was a passionate
idealist, and his sympathy, courage, and patriotism were now aroused.
He construed the Monroe doctrine to mean that we were to protect
a South or Central American state from wrongful actions by Euro-
pean powers. He did not say that Venezuela was injured by Eng-
land, but he thought we were justified in demanding an investigation
by arbitration in order to see if encroachments had been made. This
THE MONROE DOCTRINE REVIEWED 779
position was clearly stated in a despatch which Secretary Olney sent
to London in July, 1895. The secretary was newly in office, and on
that ground we may, perhaps, pardon him the use of language need-
lessly sharp.
Olney's demand rudely shocked the British foreign office. Lord Salis-
bury's delay in replying shows his opinion of what he undoubtedly
thought a bit of American bluster, and it was not until
November 26 that he sent his answer. It dealt chiefly
with the Monroe doctrine, showing conclusively that it
was created for a special occasion which was not like the
situation then existing on the Orinoco. He argued at length that the
United States had no rights of protection over Western states which
other nations had not. In his eyes the Monroe doctrine in 1895 was
only an historical fact, and if Cleveland had dropped the case at that
stage it must have been taken as acquiescence in Salisbury's view.
His persistence involved the assertion of a new doctrine, like that of
1823 in the fundamental fact that it aimed to save Venezuela from
foreign aggression, but going further and assuming the exclusive right
of protection which Lord Salisbury denied. It was a most important
step, for without it the United States could not play the overweening
role in the Western Hemisphere to which many recent actions seem to
commit them.
All this occurred within the field of diplomacy, and the public
was ignorant of it. But December 17, two weeks after the annual
message, the correspondence of Olney and Salisbury was
sent to congress, with a message in which Cleveland stated Cleveland's
his interpretation of the Monroe doctrine as it applied to Venezuela
the present case in words which left no doubt of his mean- D^I^'
ing. "The dispute," he said, "has reached such a stage 1895.
as to make it now incumbent upon the United States to
take measures to determine with sufficient certainty for its justifica-
tion what is the true divisional line between the Republic of Vene-
zuela and British Guiana," and he suggested an American boundary
commission whose judgment we should enforce at any cost. In clos-
ing he sent a spirited appeal to the American people in these memorable
words : "There is no calamity which a great nation can invite which
equals that which follows a supine submission to wrong and injustice
and the consequent loss of national self-respect and honor."
When this message was read in congress it was heard in awed
silence, followed by an outburst of applause from democrats and re-
publicans. Hitt, republican leader of the house, intro-
duced a bill to create the proposed boundary commission,
and in three days it was a law by a unanimous vote in Message,
each house. But outside of congress there was a short
period of hesitation. Nobody in England or America had thought
of a war between the two nations, and the people did not at once
780 A NEW PHASE OF AMERICAN DIPLOMACY
grasp its import. Some Londoners, taking the message jocosely,
cabled, in allusion to experiences at the recent yacht races for the
America's cup, "When our warships enter New York harbor, we
hope that your excursion boats will not interfere with them." To
which the recipients replied, "For your sake it is to be hoped that
your warships are better than your yachts." A little reflection showed
how serious was the situation, and a sharp fall in the prices of stocks
indicated that the people of the two countries were alarmed.
Up to this point the British people knew nothing of the real nature
of the controversy. They were ever friendly to arbitration and were
disappointed because their prime minister had overridden
AcceptsV- the aPPeals for it:- Three hundred and fifty-four members
bitration. °^ tne n°iise of commons, in order to rebuke his high
action, sent a petition to President Cleveland that future
disputes might be settled by friendly arbitration. Opinion out of
parliament, at first aroused at what the people thought a national
insult, slowly came around to the same position, and the ministry
found itself repudiated on the point in question. This change of
sentiment was reflected in the courtesy of the British reply when our
Venezuelan commission asked for British charts to enable it to per-
form its functions. Finally, February 27, 1896, the United States
ventured to suggest that the incident be discussed in Washington
for settlement. The reply was favorable, and the case took a still
more agreeable turn when a short time later England decided to ap-
point a commission to arbitrate all matters of dispute between herself
and Venezuela, thus doing under the influence of an aroused British
sentiment what the ministry had for years refused to consider.
Cleveland's Venezuelan commission took up its task in 1896. It
sent Professors J. Franklin Jameson and George L. Burr to Europe
to examine archives. Before its work was accomplished the British
and American governments had appointed the arbitration board
the former had agreed to accept, and the American commission sus-
pended its work. The report of the board, in 1899, gave England
most of the disputed area ; but the region east of the mouth of the
Orinoco, all the extensions west of the Schomburgk line, and some
narrow strips east of it were awarded to Venezuela.
The Venezuelan incident calls attention particularly to the character
of Cleveland. It seemed strange to some that a president, ordinarily
a man of peace, who in March ordered the flag lowered in Honolulu
should in the following December precipitate the Venezuelan war
scare. Probably a strong sense of wrong done to a weak power by a
great one was the underlying impulse in each case. In the one a
queen was deprived of her throne ; in the other a vast empire seemed
to bully a helpless nation. Spite of the popular enthusiasm the mes-
sage evoked, there were expressions of discontent. The speculative
portion of the business world, just recovering from the depression of
CLEVELAND'S RESPONSIBILITY 781
1895, were disgusted when the prices of stocks tumbled, and pronounced
the president a rash blunderer. Other persons said he wished to
restore his waning political prestige ; still others criticized his inter-
pretation of the Monroe doctrine. He undoubtedly gave the doc-
trine a new interpretation, but it was, as we have seen, probably a
necessary one. The announcement, also, of his position was brusque.
But it was his habit to be outspoken, and tact was never his charac-
teristic. The people loved him for his directness as they loved and
trusted Jackson sixty years earlier for the same quality; and they
approved his assertion of energy in diplomacy. It cannot be doubted
that his action brought other powers to respect more than ever before
our claims and responsibilities in the Western world, and prepared
our own nation for the new international part it was to play in the
succeeding administration.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For general history see : Dewey, National Problems (1907) ; Sparks, National
Development (1907); Peck, Twenty Years of the Republic (1907), interesting in its
presentation of foreign affairs; and Wilson, History of the American People, 5 vols.
(1902).
For general diplomatic history see: Henderson, American Diplomatic Questions
(1901); Woolsey, American Foreign Policy (1898); Moore, American Diplomacy
(1905); Latane", Diplomatic Relations of the United States and Spanish America
(1900) ; Snow, Treaties and Topics in American Diplomacy (1894) ; Foster, Century
of American Diplomacy (1902); Ibid., American Diplomacy in the Orient (1903);
Callahan, American Relations in the Pacific and Far East (1901) ; Hart, Foundations
of American Foreign Policy (1901), not an extensive treatment, but there is a good
bibliography; Reinsch, World Politics and the Oriental Situation (1900); and
Colquhoun, Mastery of the Pacific (1902).
For material more or less documentary see : Bryan, Compilation of Treaties in
Force, i86i-i8gQ (1899); Moore, Digest of International Law, 8 vols. (1890-1896),
an invaluable work; Ibid., Index of Published Volumes of Foreign Relations, 1861-
1899 (1902) ; and Wharton, Digest of International Law, 3 vols. (1886).
Most of the works here mentioned deal in detail with the specific topics of di-
plomacy in the Pacific. Others are : Chambers, Constitutional History of Hawaii
(Johns Hopkins Studies, 1896) ; Carpenter, America in Hawaii (1899) ; Blackman,
Making of Hawaii (1899) '•> Proceedings of the Tribunal of Arbitration at Paris, 1892,
15 vols.; Conant, The United States in the Orient (1900), primarily economic, but
is valuable for the general point of view; Calderon, Latin America (trans. 1913) ;
Seward, Chinese Immigration (1881); Whitney, Chinese and the Chinese Question
(1888); Dawson, South American Republics, 2 vols. (1903) ; and Cleveland, Vene-
zuela Boundary Controversy (Century Magazine, vol. LXII).
For Independent Reading
Stevenson, A Footnote to History (1891), on Samoan incident; Mahan, The Prob-
lem of Asia and its Effect on International Policies (1900) ; Armstrong, Round the
World with King Kalakaua (1904) ; Evans, A Sailor's Log (1901) ; Schley, Forty-
five Years under the Flag (1904) ; Morton, The Siege of Peking (1900) ; and Krout,
Hawaii, a Revolution (1898).
CHAPTER XXXVIII
THE WAR WITH SPAIN
SPAIN AND CUBA
THROUGHOUT the last half of the nineteenth century, Cuba and
Porto Rico remained Spam's only American colonies. Both islands
were rich m agricultural resources, and their export and
imPort duties yielded large sums for her treasury. So
much were they exploited that a party in Cuba was formed
to strive for a greater degree of self-government. It had for leaders
some of the men of wealth and influence in the island, but most of its
membership were of the middle and lower classes, many of them men
of negro blood. The majority of the wealthy and intelligent islanders
had no sympathy for the liberal movement and no confidence in the
ability of the liberals to govern the island, if independence should be
gained. Thus in all the striving which filled this long period there
were two parties, an aristocratic one in favor of Spain and a popular
one in favor of independence.
In 1868 the latter began a war for freedom. Their most important
leader was Queseda, a man of great devotion and much ability. He
f realized that his followers could not cope with the great
War army sent against them, and resorted to guerilla warfare.
He divided his forces into small mounted bands, badly
armed but strong in the predatory instinct, and sent them against
whatever exposed position the enemy offered. They burned property,
ravaged the crops, and took life relentlessly, making themselves terrors
to all who did not support their cause. The Spanish army was
strong in infantry and weak in cavalry, and it could only extend its
garrisons in the infected districts and wait for time to wear out the
revolutionists. By 1878 this was accomplished, and resistance ceased
when concessions were promised. But the ten years' war left the
country a waste.
It also led to unpleasant relations between the United States and
Spain. An insurgent junta in New Orleans and in New York sent
powerful aid to the revolt in the form of arms and sup-
the United P^es> and many Cubans escaping to our shores took oaths
states. °f American citizenship and returned to the island to
serve under the revolutionists. This naturally enraged
the Spanish governor of Cuba, but the orders he issued in opposition
to it went beyond the bounds of international comity. Vessels taking
782
THE VIRGINIUS 783
recruits and supplies to the insurgents, he declared, should be con-
sidered piratical, "and all persons captured in such vessels," he added,
"without regard to their number, will be immediately executed."
The United States protested against the decree, and it was withdrawn
some time after it was promulgated. By international law a ship
of the kind indicated might be seized for carrying contraband, or for
smuggling, but it was not piratical, and foreigners engaged on it were
not liable to death. The local Spanish officials resented the repeal
of the order just mentioned, and they met the desperate methods of
the insurgents with the most cruel decrees. The military commander
in the island ordered the natives to remain on their premises on
penalty of death, and threatened to burn unoccupied dwellings. In
1869 two native Americans, one a passenger and the other a sailor,
were executed because they were on a captured vessel carrying re-
cruits to the revolutionists. Although Spain took steps to prevent
a recurrence of such an affair, it caused much resentment in America,
where feeling favored the insurgents.
In 1873 the Virginius, a well-known filibustering ship, was taken on
the high seas and carried into Santiago harbor. The crew of 52 and
the 103 passengers, among whom were 8 American, several
British, and one French subjects, were sent before a sum-
mary court martial, and within five days 53 of them, in-
eluding the captain, an American citizen, were shot as
pirates, spite of the protests of the American, British, and French
consuls. The Spanish officer in command declared that he obeyed
the orders of his superiors. The proceedings were not known in
Madrid until it was too late to stop them. The ministry there, as
soon as it knew of the capture, sent orders that no sentences be carried
out without permission from that quarter. The despatch reached
Havana in time to save some of the victims, but it was delayed be-
tween that point and Santiago. It seemed to the people of the United
States that bloodthirsty subordinates in Cuba hurried on the processes
of their courts and nullified a clemency they despised.
The affair brought the two nations to the verge of war. General
Sickles, our minister in Madrid, seems to have desired to precipitate
hostilities, and conducted the negotiations intrusted to
him in such a way that a rupture was imminent. But
Secretary Fish, his superior, at last realized that the matter
should be withdrawn from the hands of Sickles and shifted the nego-
tiations to Washington (see page 674). Spain declared that the Vir-
ginius was not an American ship and promised reparation in a month,
if investigation showed the contrary. Meantime, she handed over
the Virginius with the surviving persons taken on it. The vessel
started for American ports, but foundered and sank in a storm off
Hatteras. The investigation showed she had no right to carry the
United States flag, and that her American registry was fraudulent.
784 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
Spain, therefore, did not salute our flag, as she had agreed to do if
the finding had been otherwise; but in 1875 she contributed $80,000
to be distributed among the relatives of the Americans shot at San-
tiago. This disposition of the incident did not satisfy
the maJ°rity of the American people. They recognized
Remem t^ie anmills m the proceedings at Santiago and repaid
bered. it with dislike. They were especially outraged when
Brigadier General Burriel, who gave the bloody orders at
Santiago, was in 1875, after a short period of suspension, made a major
general and given a high command in Spain.
While the war went on, the government at Washington several
times urged Spain to make concessions to the revolting party in
order to have peace. The reply was invariably the same :
Spain was ready to give Cuba reforms, and would do so
Urged. as soon as authority was respected, but honor forbade
concessions to a rebellious province. Our protests were
based on commercial interests and humanity, and they embraced all
the arguments which were marshaled into service in the negotiations
preceding the war in 1898. We even talked of intervention, and took
pains in 1875 to let our position be known to the leading European
powers. Their attitude was hardly friendly to our proposition, and
Fish hesitated to proceed further. What we might have done does
not appear, for in 1877 the insurgent president was captured, and
Campos, commanding the army, took the submission of the island
after promising it a liberal government like that of Porto Rico. The
offer embraced representation in the cortes at Madrid, self-government
in local affairs, admission of Cubans to office, liberal suffrage, and the
relinquishment of exploitation for the benefit of Spain. Since our
own government had so persistently urged reforms like those now
promised, we felt a peculiar interest in their realization.
Then followed a series of maneuvers which disgusted the men
recently in arms. The Spanish party in Cuba was bitterly hostile to
liberalism. They declared the former insurgents unfit to
Promised share in the government, and painted black pictures of
Reforms ,. , .,. ~P , . £ „ . ,
Withheld. disorder if Campos s promises were fully carried out.
Liberalism at that time had few friends at court, and the
result was that the promises of 1878 were reduced, in the execution,
to the lowest possible terms. The suffrage was so limited that the
mass of Cubans could not vote, authority in the island fell into the
hands of the Spanish party who controlled the revenues for their
own benefit and that of the mother country, and who were, in fact,
spite of their superior intelligence and wealth, a rapacious mercan-
tile and landlord oligarchy. Against their activity few persons
cared to protest openly. The middle class submitted, but the
former followers of Queseda maintained their organization as a lib-
eral party, and awaited an opportunity to strike. They felt that
EFFORTS TO ENFORCE NEUTRALITY 785
a Spanish promise could no longer be trusted and that future fight-
ing must be for independence.
In 1895 Cuban conditions were intolerable. The annual revenue
was $26,000,000, half of which went to pay the Spanish debt and a
fourth to support the army and navy. Of the other
fourth, much went to maintain the offices created in the
island for the benefit of Spaniards, and only- $1,000,000
was given to education and public improvements. Spain had saddled
on the revenues the entire debt incurred through the ten years' war,
as well as that incurred in wars with Peru and Santo Domingo. Mili-
tary trials and a strict censorship of the press which kept down pro-
tests against existing conditions gave the situation the air of the
choicest medievalism. Finally, in February, 1895, the cortes in
Madrid gave Cuba for its self-government a council, half the members
to be appointed by the crown and half elected under the suffrage law
existent in the island. It came as the tardy fulfillment of the promise
of self-government made in 1878. The liberals realized that the last
hope of satisfactory reform was gone, and took up arms under the
leadership of Maximo Gomez.
Now reappeared guerrilla warfare in its worst form. Gomez ordered
the people to furnish no supplies to the foes of the revolution and for-
bade the planters to grind cane under pain of death as
traitors. Again buildings were burned, industry para-
lyzed, and laborers thrown out of employment and forced
to join the insurgents whose foraging was their chief means of support.
Spain threw a large army into Cuba, established numerous garrisons,
and issued threatening proclamations ; but the Cubans avoided open
battle, content to cut up exposed detachments as opportunity offered,
to reduce the country to a desert, and to dissolve their bands before
encountering the columns sent to capture them.
Again Cuban juntos operated on American soil, supplies were for-
warded, and adventurous Americans stole away to join the insurgents.
American public opinion applauded the revolutionists,
spite of President Cleveland's efforts to enforce neutrality.
How well he succeeded is shown by the fact that 33 ex- trality.
peditions were stopped before they sailed, while of the 32
which evaded the authorities and landed in Cuba, only five were taken
by the army of nearly 200,000 men which occupied the country.
Many American citizens were captured among the Cubans. Some
were native-born citizens, but many more were Cubans who had sought
protection by taking out papers of American citizenship. Spain did
not want war with our government, and was content for a time to
send such captives out of the island, while Cleveland, recognizing the
abuse of our naturalization laws, which he could not check, did not
protest strongly against what was done. Gomez well knew the best
chance of Cuban success was to bring the United States into the war.
786 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
During 1895 the commander-in-chief in Cuba was Campos, under
whose pacific policy the revolt only grew stronger. The Spanish fac-
tion protested against his conduct of the war and he was
Campos! removed early in 1896. He left Cuba, declaring that the
concession of real autonomy was the only means of restor-
ing order. Again he was met by the feeling that Spanish honor could
not permit concessions until the insurgents laid down their arms.
General Weyler, who succeeded him, "announced a policy of re-
pression. In parts of the island the revolutionists kept the rural
population terrorized and levied contributions of supplies
0 on tnem- For these districts Weyler issued his order of
reconcentration, compelling the inhabitants to remove
to garrison towns and forbidding them to travel in the abandoned
districts without written permission. It also enlarged the military
law, increased the power of military tribunals, and gave notice
that conviction for crimes subject to the death penalty would be
followed by summary execution. Spain justified this edict as nec-
essary to meet the devastation of the guerrillas, but it fell sorely on the
innocent persons who had taken no part in the struggle and who suf-
fered severely in the reconcentration camps to which they were confined
with no means of earning a livelihood. Moreover, all the restrictions
failed to accomplish the desired results, and the war went on with in-
creasing horrors during the years 1896 and 1897.
AMERICAN INTERVENTION
The cause of Cuba was popular in the United States, and Cleveland's
rigid neutrality disappointed a large portion of the people. Weyler's
reconcentration edict brought this feeling to a head, and in
Congress0 April, 1896, congress passed resolutions recognizing the
belligerency of the Cubans and offering the services of the
government to secure the recognition of independence by Spain. The
president is not bound by a resolution of congress on a matter of
belligerency, and although this had only six negative votes in the
senate and twenty-seven in the house, Cleveland clung to his policy
of neutrality to the end of his administration. Meanwhile he urged
Spain to concede reform, and was met with the usual declaration that
no concessions would be made until the Cubans laid down their arms.
In a message to congress, December 7, 1896, he discussed intervention
in all its relations, and said in conclusion that when it was evident that
Spanish authority could no longer be enforced in Cuba it
Restrained WOuld be our duty to intervene in behalf of humanity.
Cleveland. This was ominous, and England, France, and Germany
united in urging Spain to bring the Cuban struggle to a
close by adopting reforms, but again the reply was a negative. Spite
of all these things, Cleveland held to his course and was able to restrain
OUR DEMANDS ON SPAIN 787
the resentment of the people, which every day grew stronger. The
business of the country was slowly recovering from the previous years
of panic, and shuddered at the suggestion of war ; and he was anxious
to protect it. His successor, President McKinley, also supported
the business interests and maintained neutrality during the spring,
summer, and autumn of 1897 ; but he was not a man to defy congress,
and the meeting of that body was awaited with interest by all who
desired the success of the revolutionists.
There was a liberal party in Spain, and it continually demanded re-
forms in Cuba as a means of ending the war. The mass of Spaniards
favored repression, but the logic of events was against them,
and when the leading conservative in the ministry was Re*orms
assassinated on August 8 his colleagues were forced to re- sagasta.
sign, and there was a liberal ministry under Sagasta. His
task was to establish autonomy in Cuba without arousing the appre-
hension of a sensitive nation. He assumed office October 14 and ad-
dressed himself at once to a scheme of Cuban autonomy. Weyler
was recalled, General Blanco was placed in command in Cuba, recon-
centration was abandoned, an elective assembly was announced, and
other features of autonomy were adopted. President McKinley in
his first annual message suggested that no action be taken by congress
until it could be seen what effects would follow these concessions. A
year earlier the American people would have allowed the new policy
a fair trial ; now they were so much aroused that they would hear of
no further waiting. If they had no faith in promises from Madrid, if
they thought loopholes would be discovered to evade real autonomy,
Spain herself was to blame through her broken faith in the past. The
Cubans also rejected autonomy. They could hardly be expected to
accept it as long as the American people decried it. They talked
loudly of resisting to the last extremity, but it cannot be doubted that
they must have submitted had the United States been satisfied with
the reforms which Sagasta with much honesty desired to effect.
Autonomy thus was proved a failure, and only increased the embar-
rassment of Sagasta in Spain. Events drifted toward war throughout
the winter of 1897-1898, and various incidents served to accelerate
their progress.
The attitude of the United States was resented in Cuba, where the
Spanish party became so bitter toward Americans that General Fitz-
hugh Lee, the consul, advised that a ship-of-war be sent
to Havana. In accordance with the suggestion the battle-
ship Maine arrived in the harbor January 25, 1898. She Havana,
saluted the forts, and anchored at the place assigned her
by the authorities. Her presence increased rather than allayed the
anti-American feeling in the city.
A fortnight later a New York paper published a private letter from
Senor de Lome, Spanish minister in Washington, describing autonomy
788 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
as a failure and McKinley as a " cheap politician" (policastrd) . It
had been purloined and was published in the interest of the Cubans,
t and this was designed to embarrass the diplomatic relations
Letter"16 of tne two countries, then already greatly strained. The
letter was genuine, and its author could only plead that
it was not intended for publication and no notice should be taken of it.
McKinley thought otherwise, and asked for de Lome's recall. The
minister was allowed to resign, and Senor Polo y Bernabe took his
place. The incident raised feeling still higher in the United States.
Six days later, February 15, the Maine at her assigned anchorage
was blown up with a loss of 2 officers and 258 men. The ship burst
. into flames, and in twenty minutes settled in thirty feet of
Destroyed water. Two explosions were heard at an appreciable
interval. It was agreed that the second was caused by the
ignition of the ship's magazines, but one theory held that the first was
the report of a mine exploding and another that it was the explosion of
the fixed ammunition in the ship due to lax management. The Spanish
authorities expressed warmest sympathy for the loss and did what
they could to save life in the accident. Captain Sigsbee, commander
of the Maine, in his dispatch announcing the catastrophe, said ; "Pub-
lic opinion should be suspended until further proof." The people
generally were stunned : they were prepared to believe anything of
Spanish treachery, but they could not believe that Spain would do an
act which could not fail to bring on a war which she was doing her best
to avoid.
Two investigations were made, one by the United States, the other
by Spain. The former, after a careful examination of the wreck by
divers, concluded that the ship was destroyed by a mine
tion*Stfgthe w^cn set °^ one °f her magazines ; but the investigators
Accident. * would not try to account for the firing of the mine. The
outer shell of the hulk, with the steel ribs and keel, were
bent upward in a gigantic dent, which seemed to indicate an external
explosion. The other investigation, after a superficial examination
of the hulk, reported that the accident was due to an internal explosion.
Most Americans disregarded the Spanish report. They believed the
Maine was destroyed by a mine set off either by some Spaniard on his
own responsibility, or by a Cuban to bring on war, or by accident.
When the wreck was uncovered in 1911 its condition corresponded
with the reports of the American divers, and a new investigation sup-
ported the conclusion of 1898. President McKinley showed great
forbearance while the investigation was proceeding, and sent the find-
ings to the government at Madrid without demands. Neither he nor
the calmer portion of the people felt that Spain ought to make repara-
tion, but the disaster had raised American feeling to such a state of
tension that nothing short of the widest concessions to Cuba could
have averted war.
PEACE OR WAR? 789
The president now returned to the negotiations with a surer grasp
on the situation. He suggested an armistice to allow negotiations for
peace through the friendly offices of the United States,
protesting that the United States did not wish to acquire McKinley
Cuba. Sagasta seems to have been willing to meet these Armfstfce*11
suggestions, but he considered the vast wave of anti-
American feeling in his country and wished to avoid the semblance of
yielding to the Cubans. He replied that an armistice would be granted
if the Cubans would ask for it, but that nothing definite should be done
until the newly authorized Cuban parliament met on May 4. This
was the situation on April i, 1898. McKinley, realizing that his sug-
gestions were refused, prepared a message to congress which he pro-
posed to send on the sixth. That body was keen for war and only
waited the word from the executive to make it a reality. April 5 the
queen of Spain, at the request of the pope, offered a suspension of
hostilities if the Cubans would accept it. The offer made no impres-
sion on the president, but he withheld his message to congress because
the consul at Havana cabled that time was necessary to get Americans
out of the city. April 10 the Spanish minister in Washington informed
the president that the order for an armistice had been issued.
Thus at the last moment, when our hand was raised to strike, our
ultimatum was accepted. What should our president do? Behind
him were the people whom nothing short of Cuban in-
dependence would now satisfy. Concessions at the last T^^ie
moment, they reasoned, would be evaded, as in the past, McKinley.
unless we took on ourselves the heavy task of supervising
their execution. Moreover, we were quite sure, as a people, that we
wanted the removal of the last vestige of Spanish power in the Western
world, and we were not willing to forgo the opportunity to secure it.
McKinley could have withstood this sentiment. By accepting the
surrender of Spain he could have guided the situation until the colony
of Cuba would have remained at last in a situation somewhat like that
of Canada. By refusing to accept it he could secure Cuban independ-
ence. He chose the latter alternative. April 1 1 he sent a message to
congress summarizing recent negotiations, barely communicating the
Spanish note of the tenth, and asking authority to intervene, by force,
if necessary, in order to establish peace and order in Cuba.
Congress acted promptly. April 19, the anniversary of the battle
of Lexington, four resolutions were passed, the first three demanding
the independence of Cuba and authorizing the use of force
to execute the demand, and the fourth pledging the govern- Deacrlare(j
ment to withdraw all authority from Cuba when independ-
ence was accomplished and a firm government established. The last
resolution was received with derision in many parts of the world, but
it was faithfully fulfilled in 1902. The day after the resolutions
passed the Spanish minister in Washington asked for his passports ;
790 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
the next day, April 21, our own minister in Madrid, General Woodford,
made the same request and left Spain; and on the 2$th congress de-
clared that war had existed since the 2ist.
These developments were closely observed in Europe. France,
Austria, and Italy naturally sympathized with Spain ; and Germany,
mindful, perhaps, of the Samoan affair, was also out of
symPathy with the United States. The continental press
teemed with grotesque criticisms of Americans. We were
considered a nation of money getters, the cartoonists
depicted us as swine, and our pretension to intervene in Cuba was pro-
nounced a species of piracy. Our army was pronounced an armed
mob, and our navy was made a subject of ridicule. German news-
papers took the lead in this chorus. In Great Britain sentiment
favored the United States. Every prominent London paper, except
the Saturday Review, was cordial in its support. Persons connected
with the British government later said that just before war was de-
clared the German minister and other continental diplomats were
about to give the United States notice of a purpose of joint intervention
to save Spanish sovereignty and that their plan was defeated by Sir
Julian Pauncefote, British ambassador. Germany denied this asser-
tion and said that the plan for joint intervention came from Sir Julian
and was disapproved by the German emperor. It is impossible to
reconcile the two statements, but it is true that while both governments
were formally friendly we had every reason to believe that Germany
wished Spain's triumph and England desired ours.
THE WORK OF THE NAVY
As war became imminent Spain assembled her strongest ships of war
at Cape Verde islands, and April 29 they left that place for America.
They consisted of four armored cruisers and three torpedo-
tion ffxpedl" boat destroyers, commanded by Admiral Cervera. Our
Cervera. whole Atlantic seaboard was at once in a paroxysm of
terror, but it breathed easier when it reflected that Cer-
vera must touch at some Spanish port in Cuba or Porto Rico before
he could ravage our coast. To reach such a point would require ten
or more days, and it became the object of the American navy to strike
him while still in West Indian waters. All our best ships, which for
two weeks had been held in reserve to suppport the blockade we had
established along the northern shore of Cuba, were now made ready
ta intercept the Spaniards. Before they could undertake the task
assigned them the world was startled by an important event in another
quarter.
When the war began our Pacific squadron was at Hong Kong under
command of Commodore George Dewey. Through the efforts of
Theodore Roosevelt, assistant secretary of the navy, the squadron was
MANILA BAY 791
in excellent condition for offense, and April 24 it was ordered to the
Philippine islands to capture or destroy the Spanish fleet there as-
sembled. Three days later Dewey set out with the Olym-
pia, his flagship, the Baltimore, Raleigh, and Boston, pro- JJewey
tected cruisers of from 5800 to 3000 tons, the gunboats Manila *
Concord and Petrel, the revenue cutter, McCulloch, and a
collier and a supply ship, all in war coats of dull gray. At sea the
crews were shown a bombastic Spanish proclamation describing the
Americans as "all the social excrescences" of the earth. To this
Dewey added the simple order: "The squadron is bound for Manila.
Our orders are to capture or destroy the Spanish fleet." The announce-
ment was received with cheers from the crews of all the ships.
During the night of the 3oth Dewey reached the entrance of Manila
Bay, in the middle of which stands the fortified rock, Corregidor.
Without a moment's hesitation he started through, the
Olympia in the lead. He was not expected, and the flagship jujj^^g
was a mile beyond the rock when the fleet was discovered.
Fire was opened without damage to the ships, and at dawn they were
before Cavite, a strongly fortified place, five miles from the city. The
Spanish fleet was observed drawn up under the guns of the arsenal,
ready for action. The American commander was eager for battle.
Forming his squadron in a crescent at 5500 yards range he turned to
the commander of the Olympia and said quite calmly : "You may fire
when you are ready, Gridley." Instantly the guns on both sides began
their work, Dewey moving in closer as he observed that his range was
too great. After an hour the Spaniards were suffering greatly and
already crippled. Then Commodore Dewey, thinking of the comfort of
his own men, withdrew to give the crew time for breakfast, after which
he moved in and completed the work he had begun. At half past
twelve the enemy ran up the white flag and surrendered their fleet
and the arsenal at Cavite. A desultory fire continued from the city,
but it ceased in the afternoon when the American commander gave
notice that he would shell the city if another shot was fired at him.
The Spaniards lost ten warships, a transport, and a water battery.
They had 381 men killed and many more wounded. Of their ships
only two were protected cruisers. They were inferior to the Americans
in fighting ability, but the protection of their shore batteries was sup-
posed to have overcome this disadvantage. They fought bravely, but
their gunnery was bad, while that of their adversaries was extremely
good. No American ship was seriously injured, and only one Ameri-
can was killed and seven wounded. Dewey was made Rear Admiral
for his splendid victory, and March 2, 1899, congress made him an
admiral.
It was natural that he should hold the bay he had taken ; and when
he cabled his government that he could take the city if he had the
troops to occupy it, it was natural that troops should be sent. But
792 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
it was not until May 21 that they could be embarked at San Francisco,
and June 30 that they reached Manila. Meanwhile, Dewey's posi-
tion was critical. Soon after his victory foreign warships
ManiUgBay ^e§an to arrive> among them three British vessels com-
manded by Captain Chichester and five German ships
commanded by Admiral von Diedrich. The latter officer seems to
have known little of naval etiquette, and showed little respect for the
blockade of the city which the American commodore had established.
He of all the commanders present adopted an irritating course, sending
his launches close in at night beyond the lines of patrol and dogging
the American ships at whatever points they saw fit to inspect. Re-
monstrances did not restrain him, and he finally committed a clear
breach of neutrality by landing supplies for the Spaniards. To this
Dewey sent a pointed protest, closing with the words, "And say to
Admiral von Diedrich that if he wants a fight he can have it now."
The German was in a rage, and asked Captain Chichester
Attitude of wnat he would do if a conflict occurred between the Ameri-
rich. ' can and German squadrons. The Briton replied ; "There
are only two persons here who know what my instructions
are. One of those persons is myself, and the other is — Admiral
Dewey." Von Diedrich then realized that he was alone, and his
attitude became more regular. He represented a new navy,
without traditions of "sea manners," and was acting without in-
structions. But he showed the hostility his compatriots at that
time generally felt toward the United States, and he nearly pre-
cipitated a war.
The first relieving expedition arrived at Manila on June 30 and
contained 2500 men, a second arrived July 17 with 3500, a third on
July 30 with 4600, and August 4 came the great monitor,
Dewe/0' Monterey, a floating fortress bristling with guns. As these
forces were landed they occupied the captured forts, and
August 13, under command of General Wesley Merritt, they were in
position to occupy Manila, a work which they accomplished in a few
hours, notwithstanding the spirited resistance of the garrison.
Dewey's persistence at Manila committed us to our Philippine policy.
Had he left the islands to Spain they would probably have gone to
some other European power, or to Japan, and that, it seems, would
have obviated the strong check we were able to interpose, a few years
later, to the partition of China. Those who think that we should not
have become involved in oriental diplomacy are inclined to blame
Dewey for not leaving Manila after he had crushed the Spanish fleet,
which was all his instructions ordered. But the responsibility was
not his. He was in communication by cable with his government,
and President McKinley and his cabinet not only failed to order
him away, but devised the policy of occupation which followed his
achievement.
(The different Scales used she
TERRITORIAL
GROWTH
OF THE
UNITED STATES
Disputed
A Disputed by Great llriiiati
and the United States ( 1 T.VMX I2i
B Disputed by Spain and the
United States, (1SOB-1S18);
seized by the United Stales
I812' SCALE OF M.LES
sc.ic o< MILES Arra 3,600
0 j 10 20
MOAN ISLANDS 1899
e noted with particular care.)
BORHAV * CO.,N.V.
AWAITING CERVERA
793
When the Cape Verde expedition sailed westward the American
fleet on the Atlantic was in three squadrons. One under Commodore
Howell patrolled our northern coasts, another, called the
" Flying Squadron," remained at Hampton Roads under
Commodore W. S. Schley, and a third, the main squadron, Santiago,
under Rear Admiral W. T. Sampson, was at Key West con-
ducting the blockade. The announcement of Cervera's coming put the
first and second of these divisions into motion. Schley was sent around
the western end of Cuba to the southern coast, and Sampson operated
along the northern coast as far as Porto Rico and in the channels east
and west of Haiti, with scout-ships thrown far out. The Spaniard
reached Martinique safely on May n, and, learning that Sampson
was looking for him, turned southward to the Dutch island of Curasao,
where he arrived on the i4th. He had supplies for the army and
wished to reach Cienfuegos, in railroad communication with Havana.
May 15 he started for that place with a small supply of coal, but
changed his mind, and May 19 entered Santiago harbor, at the eastern
end of Cuba. At that time the Flying Squadron had not passed the
western end of the island, and Cervera, had he known it, might have
reached the desired point without molestation. His engines were in
need of repairs, and he intended after recoaling to get to sea and
threaten the American cities to the northward. In the port coaling was
slow, General Blanco, commanding in Cuba, wished him to help defend
the island, and he thus remained until his last hope of escape vanished.
May 21 Schley arrived off Cienfuegos. The inner harbor was so
concealed that he could not see what was in it, but hearing guns firing,
and seeing columns of smoke rising, he concluded that
Cervera was inside. As soon as the Spaniards reached
Santiago the fact was reported to Washington. The news
was not entirely credited, but it was sent to Sampson,
then at Key West. He thought they must go to Cinefuegos, where
they would be intercepted, and on the 2oth ordered Schley to " hold
your squadron off Cienfuegos." Next day he changed his mind and
urged the latter to go to Santiago. Schley was right to exercise
reasonable discretion, and as he thought the enemy before him he dis-
regarded the instructions, saying, " I think I have them here almost to
a certainty." But May 24 he established communications with the
Cubans on shore, learned he was mistaken, and immediately proceeded
to Santiago, where he arrived May 26. Here he saw no evidence of
the hostile fleet, concluded it was not in the harbor, the inner part of
which was hidden behind headlands, and started back to Key West
to coal his ships, thinking the water too rough to coal from the collier
accompanying him. In turning westward he disregarded positive
orders from Sampson to blockade the harbor. He had gone only 40
miles when he received directions from the secretary of the navy to
blockade Santiago, and turned back to that task.
Looking for
Cervera.
794 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
The subsequent criticisms of Schley's conduct embraced three
charges. He was said to have delayed too long at Cienf uegos ; but
in that respect he replied that he acted within the dis-
Res^onsi cretion a high officer on detached service has a right to
bility?n exercise, and he has a right to this defense. He was also
blamed for the retrograde movement at Santiago. It
seems certain that he did not try hard enough to learn whether or not
the enemy were in the inner harbor and that he showed little resource-
fulness in trying to coal at sea. The third criticism was that when he
established the blockade he lay so far out to sea that the Spaniards
might have escaped had they been enterprising. There is little doubt
that this was true. At the approach of hostilities he outranked Samp-
son, 'who was a favorite with the naval authorities. Both men
were brave officers, and bore honorable parts in the campaign which
followed.
June i Sampson arrived and took command of the blockading fleet.
He brought with him the powerful battleship Oregon, which had just
The ore on completed, since March 19, the fourteen- thousand-mile
trip from San Francisco around Cape Horn. Much fear
had been felt for her safety when she reached the Caribbean Sea just
as Cervera approached Cuba. May 9 she left Bahia, in Brazil ; May
i$ she was at Barbados ; and six days later she was off the coast of
Florida, joining Sampson at Key West as he was starting for Santiago.
When asked if she could make thirteen knots, the captain signalled
" Fourteen,^if necessary." With the arrival of Sampson, the American
fleet before Santiago included four first-class and one second-class
battleships and two fast cruisers, besides two fast converted yachts
able to meet torpedo-boat destroyers and several colliers and despatch
boats. From the date of his coming the ships took station close in-
shore, with powerful searchlights at night bearing on the harbor mouth
and always ready to fly at anything that attempted to escape.
The channel leading into the harbor is only 350 feet wide at one
point, and Sampson directed that a collier be sunk so as to block exit,
but the order was not executed when he arrived, and his first care was
to make the attempt. Lieutenant Richmond P. Hobson was selected
to carry in the Merrimac, warp her athwart the channel, and sink her
by exploding torpedoes and opening her sea valves. The point
selected was directly under the guns of Morro Castle, but hundreds of
men were ready to volunteer for the task. Only seven were taken,
and just before dawn of June 3 the vessel glided noiselessly toward the
harbor, Hobson and his devoted crew clad only in woollen underwear
and going, as all men thought, to certain death. Behind the collier
trailed a catamaran raft and a lifeboat in which they hoped to escape
if opportunity offered. At five hundred yards from the castle they
received a shower of shot, but coolly kept on, cast anchors at the desig-
nated spot, and sank the ship undisturbed by the hot fire concentrated
A CALL FOR THE ARMY
795
upon them. But before the anchors caught the vessel was swung
around by the current so that she did not settle across the channel, as
was expected. In the operation the lifeboat was carried away, and
Hobson and his crew, not hit by the Spanish shots, swam to the cata-
maran and concealed themselves under it until daylight, when they
surrendered and were sent to Morro. They were well treated, and
Admiral Cervera personally expressed admiration for their courage
and informed Sampson of their safety. The incident resulted in
failure, but the blockade continued with unrelenting vigor.
Throughout June the giant sentinels stood guard, five miles out
during the day, from one to three miles off during the night. On the
sixth Sampson bombarded the forts, but the reply was weak.
The Spanish guns were small and the ammunition was care- 5™Ses^ °f
rni^i 1. r I. J n I..L- the Block-
fully husbanded. June 7 to 17, by means of hard righting ade
by the marines, the Americans seized Guantanamo Bay
and held it for a naval base. From this point Lieutenant Victor Blue,
of the navy, with Cuban guides made two trips to the hills behind
Santiago, located the hostile fleet, and made valuable topographical
observations. His achievement, like Hobson's, was much acclaimed
by the people at home. These feats, important as accessories to other
movements, but indecisive in a large sense, marked the limit of the
power of the navy, unless Cervera should elect to take the sea. Samp-
son recognized the fact, and turned to the army, saying ; " If 10,000 men
were here, city and fleet would be ours within 48 hours. Every con-
sideration demands immediate army movement. If delayed, city will
be defended more strongly by guns taken from the fleet." He reported
the enemy in and around the city at 12,500.
LAND OPERATIONS AGAINST SANTIAGO
When the war began the regular army was enlarged to 62,000 men
and a call was issued for 125,000 volunteers. A few days later con-
gress called for 75,000 additional volunteers and authorized
three regiments of cavalry and ten regiments from the
Gulf states, composed of men immune to yellow fever.
The response was enthusiastic ; and throughout May and June regi-
ments were assembling at Chickamauga Park, in the salubrious south-
ern highlands. In August 58,688 regulars and 216,029 volunteers
were in service. One regiment of volunteer cavalry drew special
attention. It was commanded by Colonel Leonard Wood, formerly
an army surgeon, and Theodore Roosevelt, who resigned an assistant
secretaryship of the navy to be its lieutenant colonel. Most of the
men were from the Far West, cowboys, ranchmen, and Indians, but
it also contained prominent athletes from the Eastern universities. It
was popularly known as "The Rough Riders."
796 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
The regulars were assembled at Tampa, Florida, with an idea of
attacking Havana ; but the summons of Sampson took them to Santi-
ago. June 14 two infantry divisions under Brigadier
ShafterUfor°f Generals Kent and Lawton, one cavalry division under
Santiago. Major General Joseph Wheeler, formerly of the confed-
erate army, and four light and two heavy batteries of
artillery, in all 16,887 men, set sail for the front, convoyed by a detach-
ment of the navy. The " Rough Riders " served under Wheeler. The
cavalry could not take their horses for want of transports, and the en-
tire expedition lacked many necessary things. By some oversight
only three ambulances were taken. The command was given to Major
General Shafter, and on June 20 he arrived off Santiago, and two days
later the disembarkment began.
Admiral Sampson overestimated the number of Spanish troops in
Santiago. Their real number was 6500, distributed in the forts
around the city with a large detachment thrown out to
Santia5 o* ° Protect tne water supply. General Linares, in command,
was a competent officer, and the defenses were well placed,
with strong protection from barbed-wire entanglements. His men
were armed with magazine rifles using smokeless powder, while Shafter 's
men had black powder. The country around Santiago contained many
troops placed as garrisons to hold back the insurgents, but through a
strange kind of neglect they were not concentrated against the Ameri-
cans.
Shafter began to land his troops at Daiquiri on the morning of June 22.
Here the shore runs east and west, and a road, parallel to it for the most
part, reaches Siboney, six miles to the west, Las Guasimas
three miles farther on> and San Juan Hill, seven miles still
farther, and enters the city a little over a mile beyond that
elevation. Along this road the Americans must advance. By night-
fall of the 22d, 6000 men had landed through the surf at Daiquiri, the
garrison there retreating before them. Nine hundred and sixty-four of
the disembarked were dismounted cavalry under Wheeler, five hundred
of whom were "Rough Riders." It was intended that Brigadier
General Lawton should lead the advance and the cavalry bring up the
rear ; but Major General Wheeler outranked Lawton, and as Shafter
remained on the transports Wheeler assumed command on shore. He
lost no time in idleness, but moved his men to Siboney, and on the morn-
ing of the 23d attacked the retreating Spanish detachment at Las
Guasimas. It was posted on a hill overlooking a wooded valley
through which the Americans approached by two roads.
Las Guasi- They were thus divided, as they came up, but deployed
and formed line of battle. After an hour's fighting the
Spaniards withdrew toward the city. They lost nine killed and
twenty-seven wounded, while their opponents lost sixteen killed and
fifty-two wounded. The skirmish was hardly over before Lawton 's
THE DEFENSES OF SANTIAGO
797
men rushed up from Siboney in order to get into the fight. From the
crest of the captured hill Santiago could be seen, and the men were
eager to go forward ; but they were without supplies ; and it was pru-
dent to wait until the rest of the army and the stores could be landed.
It was not until July i that the advance was resumed.
Linares prepared for the onset at San Juan Hill, just east of which
runs San Juan river, a small stream. On the hill itself he placed his
first line, with a body of men thrown out to Kettle Hill, a
smaller elevation at its foot, both hills commanding the Lh^6^8
river. A second line was half a mile in the rear of the first, Defense>
and a third was 400 yards behind that and nearly a mile
from the city. The first line was manned by 521 men, the second by
411, and the third by 140. There were many men in other parts of
the field, but only a few of them were brought up in time to take part
in the defense of these lines.
THE
SANTIAGO
CAMPAIGN
C A
B B E A N
SEA
Three miles east of San Juan Hill the road crosses a small hill
called El Poso, then falls into a thickly wooded valley which stretches
away to San Juan river. Through this wood and parallel
with the road runs a small tributary of the river, the road pjjj^j'8
and river clearly discernible from San Juan Heights. Battle!
Three miles north of El Poso, on the road from Santiago to
Guantanamo, is El Caney, then a fortified village manned by 520 men.
Shafter's plan was to send Lawton with 6500 men to seize this place
and march at once down the road toward the city. When El Caney
was taken the rest of the army under Wheeler and Brigadier General
Kent was to move from their position behind El Poso, carry San Juan
Hill, and the lines behind it, then unite with Lawton's advancing
column, sweep away all further opposition, and enter Santiago. His
army thought little of the fighting capacity of the Spaniards, and did
798 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
not understand the advantage they had from smokeless powder and
improved rifles.
Lawton was confident he could carry El Caney,and promised to do it
in two hours. He moved at dawn, July i, but was delayed by wire
entanglements and the difficulty of bringing up his guns,
AttldTon an(* it: was not until 2 P-M- tnat ne nad enveloped the
El Caney. village on three sides and was ready to carry it. His
charge was received bravely, the Spaniards defending
each position to the last, stubbornly falling back from one blockhouse
to another, and finally fighting from the houses in the village until
they were, at five o'clock, forced to withdraw to the northwest. This
long battle in the hot sun under distressing conditions cost the Span-
iards 270 killed and wounded and 150 captured. Lawton lost 81 killed
and 360 wounded, and the time spent in the movement precluded his
cooperation with the main column on the Santiago road.
The other wing had not waited for him. At nine o'clock it crowded
into the road and took its route to the ford beyond which it would
form to carry the hill. There was much confusion, the
Stm Cjuan Pr°gress was slow, and all was in view of the enemy on San
Hill. Juan Hill who had the range of the road and the ford and
delivered an annoying fire. By one o'clock this perilous
march was ended, and the two brigades, 7573 in all, lay under what
cover they could find 600 yards in front of the hill they were to charge.
The men suffered continually, and were impatient to advance. For a
short time no one seemed willing to order the charge. Finally the first
cavalry brigade got permission to move ; it was followed by the second,
in which were the " Rough Riders" and the tenth regiment, colored,
and the advance became general. The men rushed up the slope in little
groups, paying slight attention to their officers, and firing as they
went. At i : 30 P.M. they reached the crest, the defenders falling back
into the second line of defense which commanded the position just
relinquished. •
The men on the hill were now in extreme danger. They were with-
out food, exhausted, demoralized by the exertions of the day, and on
the point of falling back, when General Wheeler, who was
ill early in the day, arrived and took command. He
found some intrenching tools left by the Spaniards and in-
duced General Shafter to send up others, and the hill was soon safe
from the fire of the enemy's secorid line. July 2 brought heavy rains,
from which the men had no protection. The road to the coast was a
sluice of mud along which only the most meager supplies could be
brought. Gloom settled down on the army, and it was doubtful if it
could be induced to penetrate the city in front of it. All through the
day it exchanged shots with the enemy, and the continuous firing,
with other suffering, discouraged the troops, most of whom were new
recruits and had never before seen a battle.
CERVERA AND BLANCO 799
During the night of July 2 Shafter laid the situation before his divi-
sion commanders. The nature of the discussion was not made public,
but next day he sent a despatch to Washington saying that Santiago
could not be taken with the force then on shore, and that it might be
necessary to fall back to higher ground until reenforced. Meanwhile,
he tried the effect of a stern demand on the Spanish commander, the
suggestion, as it was currently reported, of General Wheeler. At noon
on the 3d he sent a summons for surrender, threatening to bombard the
city with his heavy guns in case of refusal. These pieces were not in
position, but the enemy did not know it. General Toral, in command
since the ist, when Linares was wounded, began to parley. The de-
mand was not granted, but the departure and destruction of Cervera's
fleet on this day restored the spirit of the Americans. They extended
their lines and had the city completely invested within a week. On the
loth they began a bombardment which had the effect of renewing the
negotiations. The city was now in genuine distress ; the
fleet was destroyed, the water supply was cut off, and ^£nfa o
supplies were low. On the iyth Toral accepted terms and
handed over most of eastern Cuba, the victors agreeing to transport
to Spain the Spanish soldiers surrendered in it, 22,700 in number.
The capitulation gave great relief to the American army, men and
officers. There was much malarial fever and dysentery in the ranks
and a few cases of yellow fever of a mild type. Another week of fight-
ing might have thrown the entire force into panic.
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE SPANISH SQUADRON
Admiral Cervera saw himself bottled up in the harbor with great
dismay. He opposed from the first the expedition to the West
Indies and would have got away at the earliest moment,
but coaling was slow and General Blanco feared that his Cervera °
army, already near the point of mutiny, would take it
for abandonment by their country and break out in disorders, to
subdue which must occasion the spilling of much blood. Thus was
allowed to pass the first days of the blockade, when a successful
sortie was most possible. The army in Cuba thought a second fleet
would be sent to drive off Sampson's ships and then to unite with
Cervera to sweep all opposition from the seas ; but the higher officers,
naval and military, knew how futile was this hope. The arrival of
Shafter added to their discouragement, and some of the guns of the
squadron were landed to strengthen the land defenses. Marines were
also sent to the trenches, and Captain Bustamente, leading a detach-
ment of 500, lost his life on July i in defending San Juan Hill. June
24 Cervera, by cable, had been placed under command of Blanco,
who ordered him to aid in the defense of the city until surrender
seemed inevitable and then to go out in the best manner possible.
8oo THE WAR WITH SPAIN
This contingency was believed to have arrived on the evening of July i,
but the admiral hesitated on account of what he believed the useless
loss of life. At dawn on the 2d he unwillingly directed his fires to be
lighted and called his sailors on board. A few minutes later all his
doubts were resolved by peremptory instructions from Havana to
make the sortie. Blanco felt it would be a blot on Spanish honor to
allow the ships to fall into the hands of the enemy without a blow.
All day Saturday, July 2, the steam rose in the gauges. Sunday
morning it was at the highest point, and all the preparations were
complete. Cervera gave the order of proceeding. Like
Pl^nTfor a brave omcer ne to°k the lead in the Maria Teresa,
the Sortie, with the Vizcaya, Colon, and Oquendo following in order
at intervals of 800 yards, all armored cruisers of the modern
type. Behind them at 1000 yards came the torpedo-boat destroyers,
the Furor and Pluton, the third destroyer which set out from the Cape
Verde islands having fallen behind through disablement. He pro-
posed to turn westward when outside, try to ram the Brooklyn on
the west end of Sampson's line, draw the other American ships to
him, and thus give the ships that came later an opportunity to break
through and escape. Such tactics would mean the loss of the Teresa,
but they might save the rest of the squadron. The start was made
from the inner harbor at 9 : 15 A.M.
That morning the American ships were in a crescent, the ends three
miles apart and two and a half miles respectively from the shore.
Farthest west was the Brooklyn, Commodore Schley's
th^Amerf flagship* a fast and powerful cruiser. Next to her was
can Ship"." tne Texas, a second-class battleship, then the Iowa and
Oregon, first-class battleships, and on the eastern end
of the crescent was the Indiana, also a first-class battleship. The
Gloucester, a converted yacht, was midway between the Indiana and
the shore, while the Vixen, another small ship, was a mile and a half
west of the Brooklyn. The heavy battleship, Massachusetts, was
coaling at Guantanamo, and the cruiser, New York, Admiral Sampson
on board, was eight miles away, near Siboney, for a conference between
the admiral and General Shafter. Cervera had thus by accident
selected a moment favorable to his project ; for two of the best ships
in the blockade were off their stations, which, in view of Sampson's
excellent tactics, was all the good luck of that nature the Spaniard
could expect.
At 9 : 30 o'clock the Teresa was sighted going at full speed. Schley,
in actual command, signalled, " Clear ship for action," and "Close
up." Sampson soon saw what was happening, signalled the attack,
and made all speed for the fray. Only the Oregon had full steam up,
and for a few minutes the other ships were outstripped by the enemy.
The Teresa made straight for the Brooklyn, which at 1400 yards turned
eastward, made a great loop, and came back to the west in a course
THE SPANISH FLEET DESTROYED 801
parallel to the flying Teresa. By this time the other Spanish ships
were outside. Instead of scattering, they followed their admiral
along the shore, each engaged with the American ship which, sailing
in a parallel course farther out at sea, happened to be nearest to her.
Thus the action resolved itself into a series of magnificent duels
between powerful ironclads, metal ringing on metal, while the cannon
roared, the great engines throbbed, and the air was filled by the clouds
of smoke which rushed from the overcharged boilers. The Spaniards1
aim was bad, or their powder poor, for their shots went wild or fell
short, while the American gunnery was excellent. It was more than
the enemy could stand, and the explosion of shell after shell in his
vessels showed that he was losing the fight. The Teresa, in the
thickest of the battle, first showed signs of weakening. At 10:15
she ran for the beach six and a half miles from the harbor, a complete
wreck. Five minutes later the Oquendo, in even worse condition,
repeated the maneuver and settled in the sand half a mile west of
the Teresa. The Furor and Pluton, last out of the harbor, were raked
by the small guns of the American ships and engaged by the Gloucester
at short range with great courage. They quickly succumbed and sank
before they could reach the beach. The other Spanish ships, the
Vizcaya and Colon, passed the first danger zone with a faint hope of
escape. They were pursued by the Brooklyn, Oregon, Texas, and
Iowa, whose rising fires ever increased their speed. At n o'clock the
Vizcaya, shot-ridden and sinking, turned to the shore and ended her
course twenty miles from Santiago. The Iowa and Texas halted to
receive her surrender and rescue her drowning crew, while the Brooklyn,
Oregon, and New York, which was now coming up, held on after the
Colon, six miles in the lead. The pursuers held their fire and crowded
on all possible steam. At 12:23 the Brooklyn and Oregon were in
range and opened fire. At 1:15 the Colon gave up the struggle and
ran toward the shore. She was nearly uninjured, but her crew
opened her sea valves, and she sank before the victors could prevent
it. Thus four hours after Cervera began his dash the last of his ships
was destroyed, 323 of his crew were killed, 151 were wounded, and
1782 were prisoners, he himself being among the last-named and
on board of the Iowa. Sampson lost one man killed and one wounded,
and his ships were uninjured. He himself, because of his unlucky
position at the beginning, was not in the fight, but pursued it as fast
as his swift cruiser, the New York, could move, and came up in time to
be present at the surrender of the Colon.
Santiago was hardly taken before rumors of peace negotiation were
heard. One effect was to hasten the departure of an expedition
against Porto Rico. The government desired to occupy
the island in order to hold it as war indemnity, and all
men agreed that if Spain gave up Cuba she should be
forced to relinquish the last of her American colonies.
3*
802 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
Accordingly, General Miles set out on July 21, landed on the
southern shore of the island, and occupied town after town, en-
countering the most perfunctory resistance. In two weeks the
southern and western parts were taken, with an American loss of 3
killed and 40 wounded. The march of victory, to the disgust of the
soldiers, was interrupted by the tidings that an armistice had been
made on August 12.
REFLECTIONS ON THE WAR IN CUBA
In June, 1898, Spain had 196,000 troops in Cuba, of whom 36,000
were in Santiago province. General Blanco had distributed these to
restrain the revolutionists, and did not concentrate them
Linares. against the greater danger of the American invasion.
General Linares had 6500 at his disposal in and around
Santiago, but on July i he put only about 1 200 into the fights of El
Caney and San Juan Hill. In the evening of that day he began con-
centration, and next morning had nearly 3000 men on his lines. Late
on the 3d, Colonel Escario with 4000 fresh troops arrived from the
region west of the city. In view of the hardly won victory on the
ist, it seems that the result might have been otherwise if this con-
centration had occurred earlier.
The destruction of Spain's naval power isolated her army in Cuba
and made surrender inevitable. The American soldiers then began
to feel sympathy for men who were so suddenly overtaken
Humanity, ^y misfortune, and fraternized with them in Santiago
as soon as the capitulation was signed. Other acts of
courtesy to the vanquished won the good will of the Spanish soldiers.
Captain Evans, of the Iowa, refused to take the proffered sword of
Captain Eulate, of the Vizcaya, and Captain Phillips, of the Texas,
would not let his men cheer over the defeat of a brave foe. A Spanish
private soldier in a public letter which was published as the army
embarked said to the Americans : "You fought us as men, face to face,
with great courage, a quality we have not met with during the three
years we have carried on this war against a people without a religion,
without morals, without conscience, and of doubtful origin, who could
not confront the enemy, but shot their noble victims from ambush
and then immediately fled. . . . The descendants of the Congos
and Guineas, mingled with the blood of unscrupulous Spaniards, and
of traitors and adventurers — these people are not able to exercise
or enjoy their liberty ; for they will find it a burden to comply with the
laws which govern civilized humanity."
Most American soldiers shared this opinion of the Cuban army,
who did not aid in the battles fought in their behalf, but overran our
commissaries, consumed supplies, and pilfered whatever arms or
other valuables were left unguarded. To the American they were a
rabble beneath his contempt. He did not take into consideration the
TROPICAL DISEASE 803
effects of the long struggle on the Cubans. The guerrilla warfare to
which necessity reduced them bred the rudest habits and political
ideas, and the. opportunity for pillage attracted persons
for whom a life of regular labor had little charm. But no soldiers11
one can deny to them endurance and patriotism. If their
hatred of Spain approached the frenzy of barbarism, it was the natural
product of a tyranny which had stamped out the better feelings of the
heart.
The campaign brought home to Americans the problems of modern
warfare. It was evident that the magazine rifle and smokless powder
opened a new era in righting battles. It took 6500 Ameri-
cans three hours to carry El Caney, defended by less than
600 men with the modern arms; and at San Juan Hill
the same result was evident. The lesson of this is that war is in-
creasingly difficult and bloody and ought to be the less lightly under-
taken. This unpleasant fact is somewhat balanced by the larger
percentages of recoveries among the wounded. The new bullet
makes a smoother wound than the old leaden ball. Thus healing is
easier, and the improvement in surgery and hospital efficiency
greatly increases the success of treatment on the battlefield. Of the
1000 Americans wounded at Santiago, less than one per cent died.
Shafter's army suffered greatly through lack of foresight in assem-
bling the necessary equipment, and the commissary was not adequate
for the demands so suddenly made upon it. Complaint
was made of the beef, and serious charges were preferred
against those whose duty it was to purchase it. The cents."
wagon trains were not sufficient at first to transport the
supplies from the landing point to the lines, and the medicines were
inadequate. The men's spirits fell with the impression that they
were the victims of incompetency. They were not acclimated to
service in the tropics, the fatigues and hardships in the trenches
overwhelmed them, and by the end of July seventy per cent of the
army were suffering from malarial fever. In the language of the
commander it was "an army of convalescents." August 3 the
general officers assembled with his consent, prepared a statement of
the conditions, and suggested that the troops be removed to Montauk
Point, Long Island. Shafter concurred with this recommendation in a
separate report on the same day. Next day the officers' statement
was given to the press before it reached Washington. This "round
robin," as it was popularly called, caused needless alarm throughout
the country and sent a shock of terror to many a fireside. Giving it
to the public so soon was a breach of discipline, the responsibility for
which was not fixed on the perpetrator. August 4 the order for re-
moval was given by the secretary of war, and by the end of the
month all the troops were out of the island, their places being taken
by the newly raised immune regiments. Montauk Point proved too
804 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
cool and bracing for the enfeebled men, and the process of recovery
was slow. It was felt that it would have been better to transfer
the regiments to the more moderate climate of the coasts of North
Carolina or Virginia.
In the discouragement of the moment General Shafter was much
criticized. He was physically a large man, over fifty years old, afflicted
with the gout, and not active enough for the task assigned
Shafter. ^m' But ^e was a &°°d soldier, resolute, sensible, and
brave, and his plan of campaign was admirable. He did
not deserve all the blame he got : part of it should be laid to men who
threw newly recruited regiments into a most difficult operation ;
for adequate preparations could not be made in the time allowed.
He was assigned to the expedition by General Miles, head of the army,
under the impression that the campaign would be of minor im-
portance. It was believed that the chief operations would be against
Havana, and these Miles expected to lead himself.
A controversy arose between the friends of Admiral Sampson and
those of Commodore Schley in reference to the conduct of the latter
at Santiago. When Sampson steamed up as the Colon
8on-Schie~ was sm^mS> Schley signaled congratulation and received
Controversy. tne curt reply> "Report your Casualties." To the public
this seemed ungenerous. Sampson's promotion was not
generally approved in the first instance, and his conduct after the
battle seemed to support the opinion that he was not only a pet
of the bureaucracy but a heartless seeker of his own glory. Such a
view did Sampson injustice. He was a good officer and had con-
ducted the campaign well, but the public was in no mood to recognize
it. When President McKinley, in distributing the rewards for the
commanders of ships at Santiago, recommended that Sampson be
advanced eight numbers and Schley six, the controversy became acute.
The senate reflected the feeling in the country and deferred con-
sideration. By this time feeling ran high on both sides, and so many
charges were made against Schley that in 1001 he demanded an in-
vestigation. Admiral Dewey presided over the court of inquiry, whose
verdict acquitted Schley of cowardice, which had been freely charged
by his critics, but it found that he was vacillating and unenterprising
before June i, 1898. Dewey, in a separate opinion, declared that
Schley was in command at the battle off Santiago and deserved the
credit for the victory. President Roosevelt, reviewing the verdict,
supported the finding of the majority of the court and declared that
Sampson was technically in command in the battle, but that it was
"a captain's fight." This disposal of the dispute did not satisfy the
public, although McKinley's recommendations were finally accepted
by the senate, and the controversy died slowly.
OWNERSHIP OF THE PHILIPPINES 805
PEACE NEGOTIATIONS
The rapid course of events in Cuba and the Philippines awakened
Spain from her habitual indecision, and July 18, the day after the sur-
render of Santiago, she asked France to open negotiations
in her behalf. Accordingly, the French minister ap- Pfot°col
proached President McKinley and received a tentative August* 12.
statement of our terms. Several notes were exchanged,
and August 1 2 a protocol was signed, Spain agreeing to evacuate Cuba
immediately and to cede Porto Rico and one of the Ladrone islands
as indemnity. The Philippines were to be left in statu quo, their dis-
position to be determined when a formal treaty was made by com-
missioners appointed to meet in Paris, October i. The day after this
protocol was signed, and before the news was carried to the Philippines,
Manila was taken by the Americans.
Opinions on holding the archipelago now developed rapidly. Many
persons saw in the situation an opportunity and a duty to acquire
the islands in order to convert the people and instill in
them western ideals. Some thought acquisition would J^J^Jey
imply vast commercial possibilities. Still others, and Philippines,
these were probably the most numerous, thought chiefly of
the national glory which, they believed, grew with the size of the
domains over which the flag floated. Conservative men pointed out
the perils expansion would introduce; the difficulties of governing
remote territory and widely dissimilar races, the expensive enlarge-
ment of the navy which was sure to follow, the stimulus to militarism,
and the danger from departing from our traditional policy of non-
interference — all these were urged as reasons why we should not
acquire the Philippines. They were entirely futile. So strong was
opinion for acquisition that the president dared not resist. When the
peace commissioners departed for Paris they were uninstructed on
this important question ; for he was awaiting the development of
opinion. At the end of a month his mind was made up. We needed
a foothold in the islands in order to protect our interests in the East ;
if we took one island for this purpose, complications would ensue with
the owner of the others ; and, therefore, we should have all or none.
In this dilemma, the president decided to demand all as a purchase.
Spain hesitated, but was not able to renew the war and was forced to
yield. The price agreed on was $20,000,000.
Much of Spain's large debt was secured by pledging Cuban revenues.
Unless the holders of the debt agreed otherwise, the debt would go
with the island. There was, therefore, some subtlety in
the offer to transfer Cuba to the United States ; for it could
not be doubted that the bondholders would never release
us willingly from the suretyship, if we once permitted it.
Neither would they take the Cubans for security. When we refused
8o6 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
to accept a transfer of the island to ourselves, Spain could do nothing
but acquiesce and shoulder of her own strength the immense debt
she had contracted in two wars to subdue the revolutionists. It was
agreed that Spain should relinquish sovereignty in Cuba, that we
should occupy it until we saw fit to hand it over to the Cubans, and
that we should defray the expense of the occupation.
The other subjects of discussion were easily settled. Guam, in the
Ladrone group, and Porto Rico were given up as indemnity, and
each nation assumed the claims of its own citizens against
Features of ^e otner- -'-t was a^so stipulated that congress should
the Treaty, regulate the civil and political status of the ceded territory,
a provision of importance in later proceedings concerning
our government of dependencies. This treaty found serious opposi-
tion in the senate on account of its Philippine clause. It committed
us to expansion, and reversed the policy of a century. February 4,
1899, while it still hung in the balance, came the insurrection of the
Filipinos. Some dissenting senators, feeling that we could not now
withdraw from the islands, abandoned their objections, and the treaty
was approved February 6.
SUBSEQUENT RELATIONS WITH CUBA
It was January i, 1899, when under the protocol the Spanish flag
in Havana gave place to the stars and stripes, and an American
military government took up the task of restoring a dev-
Order^8 astated land to the ways of peace. Its first care was
Cuba. sanitation. Cuban towns, in the best days of the old
regime, were badly drained and full of disease-breeding
conditions : at the end of the war, they were more than ever wretched.
American engineers gave themselves to the work of improvement,
and in two years Cuba was clean and public works were established
by which it might remain so. An American army surgeon, Major
Walter Reed, proved that yellow fever is only transmitted by a mos-
quito, the deadly stygomyia. Further investigation has shown that
other dreaded fevers peculiar to the tropics are transmitted by in-
sects ; and by taking proper precaution it has thus been possible to
make life as safe in those regions as in other parts of the world.
Another service of the Americans was to establish a modern system of
public education. Its need is shown by the fact that before that time
two-thirds of the population could not read and write. But their
greatest task was to organize government harmoniously. The
old Spanish party had no confidence in the party of liberation, and
without American supervision the two factions would probably have
been at each other's throats. The situation was met by conferring the
suffrage cautiously. All were allowed to vote who could read and
write, or owned $250 worth of property, or had served in the army of
RIGHT OF INTERVENTION PERMANENT 807
liberation. In June, 1900, municipal elections were held under this
arrangement. They passed off quietly, and in September a general
election was held for members of a constitutional convention, which
met November 5. It adopted a republican form of government, em-
bracing a congress of two houses, a president, and a supreme court.
The convention omitted from the constitution any reference to
future relations with the United States, desiring to leave Cuban
sovereignty unimpaired. But our government did not
mean that Cuban affairs should fall into chaos and invite pVltt
the intervention of foreign powers through lack of super-
vision. Congress, therefore, in 1901 delivered its ulti-
matum in the Platt amendment to the army appropriation bill. It
directed the president to withdraw the army when the Cuban constitu-
tion provided: (i) that no foreign power should ever effect a lodgment
in the island or establish control over it, (2) that Cuba should contract
no debt for which the revenues were inadequate, (3) that the United
States might intervene to preserve independence, order, and republican
government, and to see that Cuba discharged her obligations to other
nations, (4) that Cuba approve the acts of the military government
in the island and continue the sanitary reforms there, and (5) that
the United States retain the Isle of Pines and naval stations subject
to future settlement. This condition was accepted by the Cuban
constitutional convention. Later in the year, a general election was
held, and May 20, 1902, a Cuban president, Thomas Estrada Palma,
took the place of the American military governor. In the two years
and a half of control the Cuban revenues were $57,000,000, of which
more than $55,000,000 went for restoration, and the rest remained in
the treasury.
Lawlessness was deeply planted in the minds of the Cuban masses
during the long resistance to Spain, and it disappeared slowly in the
days of independence. The attempts of President Palma
to enforce the law produced dissatisfaction, and his op-
ponents, disputing his reelection in 1906, took up arms.
President Roosevelt felt justified in intervening to restore order. He
assigned the task of Secretary of War Taft, who assumed the office
of military governor, displacing Palma, who yielded without protest.
The arrival of a body of United States troops disposed of the insurrec-
tion and sobered the imagination of the people. Governor Taft
returned to Washington after a few months, but his successor, Gov-
ernor Magoon, ruled in the island until the end of the period of occu-
pation in 1909. With his departure, a Cuban president was again
installed, and peace has reigned to this day. It seems certain that the
consciousness that disorders will be followed by intervention facilitates
the development of self-government and good order.
8o8 THE WAR WITH SPAIN
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
For general works see : Latane, America as a World Power (1907) ; Peck, Twenty
Years of the Republic (1907) ; Long, The New American Navy, 2 vols. (1903) ; Lodge,
The War with Spain (1899) ; Mahan, Lessons of the War with Spain (1899) ; and
Wilcox, Short History of the War with Spain (1898).
Many books have been written on the Cuban campaign, most of them ephemeral ;
but the following may be selected as of real value : Chadwick, Relations of the
United States and Spain, Diplomacy, i vol. (1909) ; The Spanish American War, 2
vols. (1911) ; Sargent, Campaign of Santiago de Cuba, 3 vols. (1907) ; Miley, In Cuba
with Shafter (1899) ; and Kennan, Campaigning in Cuba (1899).
The United States office of naval intelligence has published in translation the
following from Spanish sources : Cervera y Topete, Spanish- American War (1899),
containing Cervera's correspondence; Muller y Tejeiro, Battles and Capitulation
of Santiago (1898), the second edition is more inclusive than the first; Concas y
Palan, Squadron of Admiral Cervera (1898); and Nunez, Spanish- American War
Blockade and Coast Defense (1898). In the same connection appeared Pliiddermann,
Comments on the Main Features of the War with Spain.
On the war in the Philippines see : Millett, The Expedition to the Philippines
(1899) ; Oscar K. Davis, Our Conquest in the Pacific (1899) ; Mahan, Lessons of the
War with Spain (1899) ; Dinwiddie, Puerto Rico, Its Conditions and Possibilities
(1899); and Foreman, Philippine Islands (ed. 1906). An exceedingly valuable
work is Blair and Robertson, The Philippine Islands, 55 vols. (1903-1909), a com-
prehensive collection of sources from the earliest time with a good bibliography.
The following biographies and reminiscences are also valuable : Dewey, Life and
Times of Admiral Dewey (1899) ; Barrett, Admiral George Dewey (1899) ; Funston,
Memoir of Two Wars (1911) ; Schley, Forty-five Years under the Flag (1904) ; Miles
Serving the Republic (1911); Evans, A Sailor's Log (1901); Roosevelt, Rough
Riders (1899) ; and Hobson, Sinking of the Merrimac (1899).
Of the many government publications relating to the war with Spain the following
are important : Richardson, Messages and Papers of the Presidents, 10 vols. (1896-
1899) ; The Congressional Record, for debates ; Foreign Relations of the United States
for 1898 (published in 1901); Messages and Documents, 1898-1899, Abridgment, 4
vols. (1899), contains the most important reports; and Compilations of the Reports
of the Committee on Foreign Relations, U. S. Senate, vol. VII (1901), on affairs in
Cuba before the war.
For Independent Reading
Long, New American Navy, 2 vols. (1903) ; Davis, Cuba and Porto Rico Campaigns
(1898) ; Bigelow, Reminiscences of the Santiago Campaign (1899) ; Millet, Expedition
to the Philippines (1899) ; Evans, A Sailor's Log (1901) ; Funston, Memoir of Two
Wars (1911) ; and Peck, Twenty Years of the Republic (1907).
CHAPTER XXXIX
EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
THE PHILIPPINES AS AN AMERICAN COLONY
SEVERAL years before the United States became interested in the
Philippines, rebellion began in the islands, and Spanish authority was
reduced nearly to a nullity. Vast tracts of the best lands
were in the hands of religious organizations, the members T.he Fili~
of which by the support of the crown monopolized munici- J^os
pal office. Their rule was heavy, and the natives formed Spaniards,
an organization to obtain a larger degree of self-government.
They presented their grievances in 1896 and took up arms when the
demands were refused. The rural districts quickly fell into their
hands, the friars were killed, imprisoned, or driven to the protection
of the garrison towns, and the whole archipelago except Manila and a
few other large towns defied Spanish authority. The authorities could
not subdue the revolutionists and resorted to cunning and bribery.
When they made large promises of reform and offered to distribute
$1,000,000 among the leaders of the revolt, resistance was abandoned.
The promised reforms were then forgotten by both parties to the bar-
gain, and only part of the bribe was paid. When Dewey sailed for
Manila, the disappointed leaders were in Singapore, and their chieftain,
Aguinaldo, a man of much ability, opened negotiations with the
Americans. Dewey received his overtures and brought
him to Manila, where he was soon at the head of a strong
force which overran the district around the city. He
established a government, republican in form, and had the obe-
dience of the natives generally. He was recognized by both General
Anderson, commanding the first forces that came to the support of
Dewey, and by the admiral himself. But by midsummer the American
government was thinking of permanent occupation, and General Mer-
ritt was ordered to establish a provisional government without regard
to that of Aguinaldo. The situation was delicate, but the natives de-
sired to avoid a conflict. They were induced to allow the Americans
to take unopposed possession of Manila when it surrendered on August
13, but they entered the place with their army and for a time occupied
certain portions of it.
The Filipinos saw with concern the ripening purpose of the United
809
8io EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
States to acquire the Philippines. They withdrew from the city to
avoid conflicts between the soldiery of the two armies,
theVFffi-f but thev kept sharP eyes on the negotiations at Paris,
pinos. They also watched keenly the debate in the senate at
Washington on ratifying the treaty with Spain, and Feb-
ruary 4, two days before ratification, attacked Manila in a fierce
night battle. Instantly the islands were in a flame. February
5, 6, and 10 the whole American force in the city was
busy in beating off the assault, and succeeded in extending
its lines beyond the suburbs. Aguinaldo could not withstand
the attack. The Americans took town after town, but must
hold with garrisons all they won. The rainy season, from May to
the end of September, interrupted the conquest, but October saw it
renewed with a stronger force. In two months the treasurer, secre-
tary of the interior, and president of the Filipino congress were cap-
tured, but Aguinaldo eluded his pursuers, went into hiding, and
directed resistance in isolated parts. After a year's fighting, 400
American posts held the population down, but there was no real
submission by the natives.
Thus passed a year, no one knowing when the invisible leader
would kindle another general outbreak. Finally, February i, 1901,
it was learned that he was at Palanan, in the inac-
CfTtur d° cessible mountains of Isabella province. General Funston
with four American officers and some friendly natives
volunteered to capture him. Landing on a wild coast, they set out for
his headquarters, nominally as a party of native soldiers who were
taking five white prisoners to the leader. They gained access to his
presence, overpowered his guard, and carried him a captive to the
coast before resistance could be offered. He was held in prison for
a time in Manila and finally sent into exile. The war did not cease
for a year longer, but its central will was broken. The leaders
who held out acted for themselves, and one after another were
forced to surrender. The last resistance was overcome in April,
1902.
The first government under American control was military, but it
was temporary. In 1899 a step toward a permanent system was
taken, when a Philippine Commission was sent out with
The Philip- President Schurman of Cornell University at the head,
mission"1 an<^ Admiral Dewey, General Otis, Charles Denby, and
Professor Dean C. Worcester as the other members. It
was given wide authority to study conditions in the islands and to
adopt a policy which would lead to self-government as the natives
showed political ability. To apply the fifteenth amendment to the situa-
tion was evidently absurd. A great many of the people were illiterate,
and most of them were without rudimentary knowledge of civil life.
They were in many tribes, spoke a variety of languages, and were
PROGRESS OF CIVIL GOVERNMENT 811
used to the authority of a strong superior. The report of the Schur-
man Commission brought out these facts and suggested that the Fili-
pinos should not have self-government at once.
It was decided to follow the suggestion, and the commission was
reorganized with William H. Taft, of Ohio, at the head. Here began
an administrative career which for tact and skill in the
management of delicate problems has rarely been equaled Taftia
in American history. Local governments were established
as seemed advisable, suffrage was granted to the most capable, and it
was announced that a central civil government would be created as
soon as a working local government was established. After a year
and a half of this fundamental organization the promise
was redeemed, and Taft became the first civil governor of Jj^^j
the Philippines, retaining, however, his position as presi- stituted.
dent of the commission. The other commissioners be-
came a part of an executive council to which three natives were added,
and four executive departments — the interior, commerce and police,
finance and justice, and education — were created. The governor
and council had supreme executive functions under the government
at Washington. Thirty-five provinces were created, with adminis-
trative heads appointed by the governor. An appointive system was
thus established as best suited to the needs of the people. At the same
time, the beginning of suffrage appeared in municipalities. All were
allowed to vote who could read and write English or Spanish, or who
had held municipal office in the past, or owned real property worth
$250, or paid taxes to the amount of $30 a year.
All this was done by the president of the United States through
power conferred by congress. The system worked well, and July i,
1902, congress enlarged the plan and made it permanent.
A law now made the inhabitants " citizens of the Philip- JJjf
pine Islands," with the rights of life, property, ancUiberty, IjC1g02.
except that of trial by jury. It directed a census to be
taken, and decreed the organization, two years thereafter, of a Phil-
ippine legislative assembly of two houses, the lower to be elective, the
upper to be the Philippine Commission. The total population was
7,600,000, and the system provided was to extend to those districts
only whose inhabitants were Christians, about 7,000,000. The re-
mainder were classed as wild tribes and continued under military rule.
But the next year a special district was created for these people, in-
cluding the Moros and Sulu islanders, with a distinct governor and
council, and with no thought of a legislature. For the regular Phil-
ippine government the suffrage law already introduced was con-
tinued.
The census contemplated in the act of July i, 1902, was completed
in 1905, and elections for an assembly were held in 1907, eight years
after the American regime began. Of the 7,000,000 natives concerned
8i2 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
only 104,966 registered under the qualified suffrage law ; and of these
only 100,439 voted. They, were divided into two parties. One,
known as nationalists, complained that the existing govern-
^ne A^5" ment was to° expensive and gave too many offices to
sembly. Americans. They aimed at independence in the near future
and appealed to the most fervidly patriotic class. The
other party was called progressives and supported development under
American authority. It laid itself open to the charge of selfishness in
seeking offices, of betraying national interests, and of lack of courage ;
but it reflected the best interests of the islands. The. nationalists
carried the elections and organized the lower house of the
Parties assembly, but showed an unexpected amount of self-con-
trol in the exercise of power. As a party measure they
carried a resolution favoring independence, but wisely cooperated in
many measures to develop agricultural, educational, and administra-
tive conditions. Later assemblies have repeated the same story,
and it seems that the political life of the islands has fallen into step
with the steady evolution to be expected under such circumstances.
As in Cuba, American occupation has brought many improvements
in sanitation, education, and public utilities, most of them paid for
out of the island revenues. In 1906 the system of educa-
tion embraced 3435 primary, 162 grammar, 36 high, and
ments. 22 technical, schools, employing in all 5400 native, and
about 800 American, teachers, at a total cost of $2,421,222.
The persistence of the American tariff against the islands restrained
business progress. But Governor Taft's urgent requests for relief
could not break the opposition of the tariff party in the American con-
gress. It was not until he became president that he was able to do
Tariff something. The Payne- Aldrich bill (1909) allowed the
free annual importation of 300,000 pounds of Philippine
sugar, 150,000,000. cigars, 300,000 pounds of wrapper tobacco,
1,000,000 pounds of filler tobacco, and an unlimited amount of hemp.
From the Spanish regime came a controversy difficult to settle and
likely to enter into politics in continental America. The friars for-
Friar Land merly owned 400,000 acres of the best land in the country,
letting it to tenants on long-term leases. Since the revolt
of 1896 it had been out of their possession, and the occupants had come
to look upon it as their own. The friars desired the new government
to reinstate them in possession and appealed to the president of the
United States. After some hesitation, no better way was seen to end
the affair than to buy the claims of the friars and then to come to terms
with the persons in possession. The purchase was accomplished in
1902, the pope acting as mediator in the negotiations and Governor
Taft representing the American government. The lands were ac-
quired for $7,000,000.
POWER OF CONGRESS ADEQUATE 813
AN AMERICAN COLONIAL POLICY
Creating civil government in the Philippines was really a new and
radical step in our political experience, and it occasioned a. serious
debate over the right of congress under the constitution
to define the status of dependencies. There was much Issu*
that was plausible in the view that the constitution made
no provision for such action. In 1787 no such a contingency seems
to have occurred to the men who made that instrument, and the situa-
tion of 1899 was a new one. The men of the day must devise a means
of meeting it. We had acquired dependencies and we could not choose
but govern them.
As soon as the question came up for consideration it was asked,
" Does the constitution follow the flag ? " This meant: Did the newly
acquired subjects become citizens of the United States,
with the rights of the inhabitants of the territories ? and " Doef ^
in a particular sense, were they within the customs limits ? *£««*
T-» -i tr TT-« i i • • TT T i rollow tne
President McKmley took a negative view. He relied on Flag?"
the powers granted to congress in the constitution to admit
new states and to " make all needful rules and regulations respecting the
territory and other property belonging to the United States" (Art. IV,
sect. 3). Jefferson exercised this power in the purchase of Louisiana,
and in establishing civil government in it. In 1828 Chief Justice Mar-
shall held that congress had the right to acquire territory, and it would
be absurd to say that territory could be acquired but not governed.
The purchase of Florida and Alaska was in exercise of this right. Con-
gress in each of these cases established the government it thought best
for these purchased territories; it might do the same thing in 1899,
and it was not essential that the same form of government suited
the new possessions that was conferred on the continental territory.
The fact that the Philippines and Porto Rico were islands and in-
habited by people whose political training was unlike ours seemed to
justify a distinct kind of government. This line of reasoning found
favor with the dominant party in congress and in the country, and it
was the basis of the colonial system now devised. It was not fol-
lowed in Hawaii, for in 1900 congress erected it into a territory, act-
ing apparently on the theory that it was likely to become a white man's
country and be admitted to the union.
Congress arrived at this decision slowly, and meanwhile the question
of customs limits must be settled. By the Dingley act,
then in force, the duties were to be levied on articles
coming from "foreign countries." Were the Philippines Limits,
and Porto Rico "foreign countries"? The protectionists
answered in the affirmative, the president took the same view, and
duties continued to be collected. Then the matter went to the courts.
814 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
In the case of De Lima v. Bidwell, in which suit was brought to re-
cover duties collected on sugar imported from Porto Rico, the court
held that the island was not a " foreign country" within the meaning of
the tariff law, but it intimated that congress could determine the tariff
relations of dependencies. In the " Fourteen-Diamond-Ring " case
the same principle was followed for goods imported from the Phil-
ippines. These two cases fell under the Dingley act, but before
they were decided congress took its position on the point at issue.
The Foraker act, April, 1900, established civil govern-
™® F r ment in Porto Rico, but the feature of it which attracted
most attention was the tariff relations of the island. Presi-
dent McKinley and a large part of the people wished the island prod-
ucts admitted free, but the beet and cane sugar growers rallied a
strong opposition on the ground that yielding at this point was the
beginning of defeat for the whole cause of protection. They were
able to force a compromise by which Porto Rican goods paid a duty of
15 per cent until March i, 1902. Another customs case, Downes v.
Bidwell, now came before the court, and it was held that the Foraker
act was constitutional. In the first cases congress had not spoken,
and the dependencies were not considered foreign in the meaning of
existing law : in the last case congress had declared its will and the
court recognized its right to decide the question. We are, therefore,
to conclude that the constitution does not follow the flag, but that con-
gress determines how far it applies to dependencies.
But little opposition was made in congress to the civil government
which the Foraker act established for Porto Rico. There was to be
a governor and an executive council appointed by the
ernmfnTfor President with the consent of the senate, at least five of the
PortoeRico.r councillors to be natives. Six councillors were to be heads
of administrative departments, with power to appoint sub-
ordinates. There was to be an assembly of two houses, the upper
to be the executive council and the lower to be elected by the people.
A United States district court and a system of island courts were pro-
vided. This plan, it will be seen, resembles in its essential features
the Philippine act of July i, 1902, and it may be taken to indicate the
spirit of our colonial system.
AN ISTHMIAN CANAL
The United States became interested in an isthmian canal in 1846,
the year they settled the Oregon boundary dispute. A treaty with
New Granada (Colombia) in that year, ratified in 1848,
(Mnion granted a right of way across Panama on the same terms
as New Granada reserved to herself, the United States
guaranteeing neutrality of the route and the sovereignty of New
Granada in the isthmus. An American company was organized to
EARLY CANAL PROJECTS 815
build a railroad at once, and began work, but the road was not
completed for several years. At the same time unavailing efforts
were made to get Mexico to concede transit privileges across the
Isthmus of Tehuantepec. We also showed our interest in such an en-
terprise by getting concessions for a canal through Nicaragua, but
England, holding the Mosquito Coast, blocked the way at the eastern
terminus. Some threatening negotiations over the subject resulted
in the Clayton-Bulwer treaty (1850), by which we agreed that the
two powers should jointly guarantee the neutrality of any canal
they constructed across the isthmus, and that other nations should
have a right to subscribe to the treaty if they chose. Later
England claimed the Mosquito Coast as a dependency of British
Honduras. Nicaragua objected and appealed to our government,
and a controversy began which led to a long period of misunderstand-
ing and much hard feeling between the two nations. The readiness
with which we agreed to the Clayton-Bulwer treaty shows how little
we cared in 1850 for an American-owned canal.
In 1869 the French completed the Suez canal, and its projector,
de Lesseps, began to think of another such work in America. He
favored the Panama route, and in 1878 Wyse, a French
engineer, got a concession for a Panama canal, to be neutral
in case of war, and the United States to share in the en-
terprise if they wished. A French company was formed with de
Lesseps in control which took over Wyse's grant and opened a popular
subscription for stock. $120,000,000 was believed enough for the
enterprise, and through the prestige of de Lesseps the amount was
over-subscribed many times. Much of the sum paid in was wasted,
and in 1882 bonds were issued for $25,000,000 which sold at 87^, and
$60,000,000 more in 1883, which sold at 57. In the latter year digging
began. Extravagance continued, and new loans were made at large
discounts. In 1887 the tidewater canal, as originally planned, was
abandoned for the lock type, thought to be less expensive. But this
gave no relief; in 1889 the company could not meet its bills, and
was dissolved by the courts. Those who undertook to rescue the en-
terprise and complete it found that $180,000,000 more were needed,
and as this sum could not be raised the project was considered hope-
less.
On casting up accounts it was seen that bonds and stock had been
issued to the nominal value of $475,000,000, but at such discounts
that they yielded only $278,000,000. The total expendi-
ture for construction proper was $118,000,000 and for
the purchase of the Panama railroad an additional
$19,000,000. The rest, $141,000,000, went for interest
on bonds, extravagant salaries, sums paid financiers and newspapers
for their support, and expenditures to provide luxurious offices. An
indignant public secured an investigation which showed widespread
816 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
corruption, in which the company's funds were used to bribe high
public officials to grant favors in support of the company's credit and
Briber to m<^uce newspapers to advocate such concessions.
Several persons were convicted of fraud, among them a
son of de Lesseps, but the chief manipulators escaped by flight. The
capitalists most largely interested in the company secured a reor-
ganization with the hope of retrieving a part of what they had lost,
but their appeals for stock subscriptions fell on deaf ears. They were
in danger of losing their charter, but Colombia extended it until 1900
to give them full opportunity to get money. As that year approached
the outlook was gloomy, for a French canal was clearly an impossibil-
ity. Then came the war of the United States against Spain, with the
prospect of an American canal. At once the reorganized French
company began to exert themselves to sell their charter and plant to
the government at Washington.
Meanwhile, let us turn back to our own country, where alarm was
felt lest de Lesseps's enterprise should give the French some national
advantage in Central America. Opinion in the United
De Lesseps States had now shifted to an American-owned canal. To
United meet this situation de Lesseps came to the United States
States. in 1880, interviewing financiers and appearing before an
investigating committee of congress. He asserted that
his company would be controlled by the stockholders irrespective of
national interest, and invited Americans to subscribe. He allayed sus-
picions for a time, but in uncovering the affairs of the company at
a later day it was found that he resorted to a skillful distribution of
shares of stock among financiers, editors, and even congressmen. For
all this he sold only a moderate amount of stock, and the demand for
an American canal was not lessened.
It found expression in plans for such a waterway through Nicara-
gua. It is true the Clayton-Bulwer treaty stood in the way, but by
its terms it could be annulled by either side on six months'
notice> an(^ many persons insisted that such a step be taken,
justifying themselves by England's questionable occupa-
tion of the Mosquito Coast. President Hayes did not go that far, but
in a message to congress, 1880, advocating an American canal, he said
that such a work would change our geographical conditions and be-
come "virtually a part of our coast line." He continued, "No other
great power would, under similar circumstances, fail to assert a right-
ful control over a work so closely and vitally affecting its interests
and welfare." Congress, however, did nothing.
Elaine, secretary of state under Garfield, took a position equally
vigorous. In a circular note to European powers he said
that our interest in the French canal was superior to that of
Attitude. i,/-«i i • j At A •
any other power but Colombia, and that in a war against
ourselves or Colombia, whose sovereignty we guaranteed, we should
THE PROJECTED NICARAGUAN CANAL 817
no more allow the passage of a hostile ship than the transit of an army
over one of our railroads to the Pacific. This strong utterance was re-
ceived with polite silence abroad and with baffled wonderment at home.
He also proposed to England a modification of the treaty of 1850,
but met with a refusal that was barely courteous. Whatever plans
he had were defeated by his retirement after the death of Garfield.
Frelinghuysen, his successor, carried on negotiations with Great Brit-
ain with less aggression but without results, and Cleveland, more
conciliatory still, allowed the matter to sleep. At the same time the
growing embarrassments of the French company eased the alarms of
Americans from that source.
But the Nicaraguan project was not forgotten. In 1884 a treaty
permitting a canal with American capital was made with Nicaragua
in return for a guarantee of the integrity of that state;
but Cleveland withdrew it from the senate before it was The Man-
ratified. Then a private " Maritime Canal Company of ^e _^r
Nicaragua" was organized, and congress was asked for Nicaragua,
a charter. The administration hesitated, fearing inter-
national complications, but congress granted the request. Subscrip-
tions came in slowly — the French company was then in its direst
straits — and the Maritime company could do little more than im-
prove the harbor at its eastern terminus. Next it appealed to congress
to guarantee $100,000,000 of its bonds. There was much discussion
of the proposition in and out of legislative halls, and finally in 1895
it passed the senate, to be lost in the house. In 1898 the charter
lapsed, but it was not doubted that Nicaragua whould renew it, if
the American government undertook to bring the enterprise to comple-
tion. This was the situation when the war against Spain ran its short
and decisive course. It so much enhanced our interest in the Pacific
that it could no longer be doubted that an isthmian canal was a ne-
cessity.
It was also clear to a vast majority of Americans that the canal
when built must be American, and that the Clayton-Bulwer treaty
should no longer stand in the way. Negotiations were
opened to that end, and in 1901, after one treaty had Clayton-
been rejected, the Hay-Pauncefote treaty was ratified in ^relJL'An-
which the arrangement of 1850 was annulled. It said nulled,
nothing about fortifications on the canal, and although
neutrality was promised by the United States, no other power became
a party to the pledge. A unilateral agreement leaves everything to
the good faith of the nation making it.
THE CANAL AT PANAMA
It was believed that the French concession at Panama could be pur-
chased by the United States, and a warm controversy now arose be-
30
8i8 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
tween those who favored that route and those who supported the
Nicaragua route, the Maritime and the French companies each push-
ing its own interest vigorously, both in the press and by
Selected*6 means of an able lobby. The transcontinental railroads
also joined in the fight, trying to impede any action at all.
Their position was so obviously selfish that they accomplished little.
A commission of engineers, headed by Admiral Walker, was ap-
pointed to consider the two routes. It reported, November 16, 1901,
that the Nicaraguan canal could be constructed for $189,864,062
and the Panama canal for $114,233,358, to which latter sum must
be added the cost of the French plant, offered at $109,142,500,
but valued by the commission at a maximum of $40,000,000.
Its report ended by recommending the northern route. This final
suggestion seems to have been made to bring the French company
to terms, for when it offered to sell for $40,000,000, the report
was modified to favor the southern route. The matter then went
to congress, which authorized the president by a vote practically
unanimous to purchase the French rights if a legal title could
be obtained. The bill also authorized the president to secure from
Colombia, in which the state of Panama lay, a right of way at least six
miles wide, and it provided for a commission to construct the canal.
Interest now centered at Bogota. Secretary Hay negotiated a treaty
with the Colombian charge d'affaires, Herran, granting a ninety-nine
years' lease, with right of renewal by the United States,
Objects** °^ a cana/l zone si* miles wide, in return for which we were
to pay $10,000,000 cash and $250,000 annually. This
agreement aroused dissatisfaction among Colombians. " Panama,"
as Professor Latane says, " was their greatest asset," and they had for
many years built high hopes on its development. Besides, their con-
stitution prohibited the alienation of territory by congress and the
proposed lease was held to amount to alienation. The agreement,
therefore, was rejected unanimously by the congress. President
Roosevelt and many Americans believed the rejection was due to cor-
rupt motives, and concluded that the Colombians desired to await the
expiration of the French charter in 1904, when they could demand
an exorbitant price. Colombia has ever denied that her motive was
chiefly mercenary, but her point seems well taken that the amount
offered was not in fair proportion to that paid later to the French
company.
The turn events took caused much disquiet at Panama, whose in-
habitants were dismayed at the prospect of having the canal go to
Nicaragua. The state had long cherished opposition to
Panama6 f * the federal authority at Bogota, charging that the latter
exploited the state to get revenues for the federal govern-
ment, until Panama was called "the milch cow of the confederation."
Moreover, in 1885, Dr. Nunez, by as high-handed methods as one could
THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA 819
imagine, had made himself dictator in Colombia and ruled the compo-
nent states through a military oligarchy whose daring use of power
in elections and elsewhere reduced republican forms of government
to a farce. At the time, therefore, when Panama saw passing away
her opportunity of realizing the dream of centuries, the construction
of the canal which would make her the center of the trade routes of the
New World, she was filled with resentment for ancient wrongs which
struck at the root of her rights as a state. The new grievance did not
create the spirit of revolt : it only ripened it.
Early in 1903 a revolutionary junto was organized in the town of
Panama on the western side of the isthmus, at its head Senor Arango
and Dr. Amador. Although they could count on the
friendship of most of the Panamans, they were so weak that
they could not succeed without the aid oi the United States ;
but they believed that would be given, at least covertly, through our
desire to get the canal route. They also needed money to raise troops
and buy arms and ammunition. They hoped to get this from the
Panama railroad, an American enterprise, which also had reason to
desire that the canal be built in Panama. Dr. Amador went to New
York to try to get funds at railroad headquarters ; but his departure
was known in Bogota, and a hint that aid to the conspirators would
lead to confiscation of the railroad charter destroyed that hope. One
other powerful interest desired the canal dug at the isthmus, the French
company. It so happened that as Dr. Amador was turned away from
the railroad offices there arrived in New York the agent of the French
company, Bunau-Varilla. He grasped the situation at once and
agreed to furnish the desired funds if he was made the minister from
the new state to Washington. Dr. Amador was overjoyed and readily
promised what was asked. He then visited Washington, interviewed
Secretary Hay, from whom he got no open encouragement, but left
convinced that if a revolution were accomplished, President Roosevelt
would recognize the de facto government. From Washing-
ton he returned to Panama, where it soon began to be
whispered about that a revolution would occur on Novem- ^ Rescue.
ber 4, 1903. This rumor was reported to the United States
by the American consul, and on November 2 the gunboat Nashville
arrived at Colon. It came to protect American property, in view of
the prospects of disturbances; but its presence gave courage to the
timid ones, who saw in it a promise of the support of the United
States.
When, as was believed, the blow was about to fall, that is to say,
on November 3, there landed at Colon 450 Colombian soldiers com-
manded by four generals. The leaders proceeded at once Thg ^^
to Panama, where the plot had its center, giving orders Struck>
for the soldiers to follow. Three Colombian gunboats
were off Panama to cooperate with the army, but the revolutionists
820 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
expected them to support the revolt. Arrived at their destination,
the generals with their staffs were made prisoners by the junto's
army, now numbering about 100 men. Two of the gunboats declared
for the same side, and the other steamed away after firing three shots,
one of which killed a Chinamen, the only blood spilt in the revolution.
Meanwhile, the force at Colon prepared to go to the defense of their
leaders, but the railroad demanded money for transportation. The
soldiers had no funds, but the officer in command threatened to seize
the trains and go without delay. The company's officers sympathized
with the revolt. By the treaty between the United States and Colom-
bia, the former nation was bound to protect the free operation of the
road, and the commander of the Nashville landed 50 marines to pre-
vent the seizure of the railroad by the Colombians. He also an-
nounced that he would not allow the transportation of troops by either
side, since that would precipitate a conflict and interfere with the free
transit of the isthmus. Had the Colombian commander been enter-
prising and earnest, he would have found a means of getting to Panama,
only 49 miles away. After two days in Colon, he embarked his troops
on a mail ship and departed. It was reported that he received a bribe
Its Success °^ ^°°° fr°m ^e revolutionists, and that when his men
discovered the fact, they despoiled him of the money and
set him ashore at Kingston without funds. The captured generals were
sent out of the country a few days later. By this time several Ameri-
can men-of-war were in the harbors of Colon and Panama. They came
to protect property and keep transit open. But when they gave notice
that, in compliance with orders from Washington, they would not allow
troops to land within 50 miles of Panama, their presence took other
significance. Colombia could not subdue the revolt without fighting
the United States, and submitted to the inevitable with bitter feelings.
November 4, the junto held meetings, organized a republic of Panama,
deposed the officers representing the Colombian authority, and in-
stalled a government of their own. Their proceedings
Republic** were approved by a mass meeting in the town of Panama.
November 6, the United States recognized the independ-
ence of the new republic, and on the same day Bunau-Varilla was
appointed its first minister at Washington. All was done by cable,
and he entered upon his duties with such despatch that by November
18 he had concluded the Hay-Bunau-Varilla convention, by which we
guaranteed the integrity of Panama and received in full sovereignty
a strip of land ten miles wide from sea to sea for the construction of
a canal. For this concession we agreed to pay $10,000,000 in cash and
$250,000 a year beginning in 1913.
Our share in these events was resented by Colombia, which had the
support of most South American states. Friends of President Roose-
velt justified his action on the ground that it was necessary to keep
transit open and to protect property, but it is hard to treat such
PLANS FOR THE CANAL 821
arguments seriously. In making the treaty, Colombia could not have
intended to sign away her right to enforce order and sovereignty in her
own borders. Keeping her from her own territory was
nothing but a forceful act in contravention of her sover-
eignty. Her rejection of the Hay-Herran convention may
have been due to unworthy motives, as the Americans
suspected, but it did not give us a right to make our bargain in our
own way at the mouth of cannon. If we must have had the Panama
route, patience and fair dealing would have secured it ; but it would
have been better to pay extravagantly rather than create the impres-
sion at this stage in our Latin American relations that we would secure
our ends by unfair means.
CANAL CONSTRUCTION
The first task of the canal commission was to make the scene of
their future operations free from the diseases peculiar to the tropics.
The discovery of the part played by the mosquito in transmitting
yellow and other fevers now served a good purpose. By draining the
breeding places of mosquitoes and screening the houses Sanitation
these diseases were reduced to a negligible factor. In five
years only nineteen Americans died of yellow fever on the isthmus. A
supply of pure water was also obtained, hospitals were built, houses
were erected for the employees, and sanitary engineers made the towns
along the route clean and wholesome. Much of the machinery re-
ceived from the French proved useless, though some of their buildings
and all of their excavation were serviceable.
The question of a lock or sea-level canal now became important.
It was referred to a group of engineers who reported that the sea-level
type could be had in fifteen years for $300,000,000 and a
lock canal in ten to twelve years for $200,000,000 to
$250,000,000. The latter type was adopted by the gov-
ernment, probably because of the shorter period of construction.
The decision disappointed those who favored the opposite type, and
for some years echoes of their misgivings were heard in the press and
in scientific discussions.
At the canal site the isthmus is 49 miles wide and runs nearly
east and west. Near its center is the water divide, an elevation 8
miles wide and 290 feet above the sea at Culebra, its TheRoutc
highest point. East of this ridge is a plain 30 miles wide,
cut by the Chagres river running out of the hills east of Culebra and
going northwestward along the line of the canal to the sea. West
and south of the divide is a short river which reaches Panama across
a plain 10 miles wide. The canal builder's task was to follow one river
to the divide, cut through the ridge at Culebra, and parallel the other
river to the ocean.
822 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
In the work as constructed they secure this result as follows : The
canal proceeds at sea-level for 8 miles to Gatun. Here an im-
mense dam is placed across the valley of the Chagres a
mile and a half long, 700 yards wide at the bottom and
100 feet at the top, really a cement-coated hill of rough stones.
It will check the waters of the river and force them back over the
plain so as to make a lake 22 miles long, to which the canal rises by
locks. West of the lake across the divide the reliance is on excavation.
This part of the canal, the Culebra cut, is of special interest because it
sinks through layers of earth and loose stones, and the walls are sub-
ject to slides. West of the cut the canal descends by locks to the
plain and crosses it at sea-level to the ocean. At the narrowest point,
in the Culebra cut, it is 300 feet wide, but the width of the Gatun lake
is so great that vessels can pass one another in it without difficulty.
In 1909 severe slides in Culebra cut and the slipping of a part of the
base of the Gatun dam caused a renewal of the agitation for a sea-
level canal. President Taft visited the scene, consulted with the
experts, and decided to proceed on the existing basis. January i,
1911, 69.7 per cent of the excavation and 56.7 per cent of the Gatun
dam had been completed, and it was believed that actual work would
Pro ess en(* ky June J> I9I3- The excellent progress of recent
years has been largely due to the efforts of Colonel George
W. Goethals, chief engineer of the canal. To the end of the fiscal
year of 1910-1911 the appropriations for the enterprise were $248,-
000,000 and it was expected that the total cost would not exceed
AMERICAN DIPLOMACY IN THE ORIENT
At the beginning of the present century the partition of China
seemed imminent. Great Britain and Germany had ninety-nine year
leases of important positions oh the Shantung peninsula,
Chinl'lm0* soutk of tne entrance of the gulf of Pechili, which leads
minent.m to tne capital of the empire. North of the entrance is
the Manchurian peninsula which Russia held on a twenty-
five year lease with absolute control in the meantime. The world
thought these leases euphonious words for permanent occupation.
China had no efficient navy or army, and regarded with dismay what
seemed the jaws of a monster about to devour her. In 1899 England
and Russia agreed that the former would not build railroads in China
north of the Great Wall and the latter south of it, which seemed to
be a bargain as to spheres of influence. France, at the same time, held
recognized interests in Kwangchu bay, in southern China.
Secretary Hay considered these events adverse to our trade inter-
ests and sent, September 6, 1899, protesting notes to London, Berlin,
and St. Petersburg. He asked that an " open-door " policy be accepted
THE BOXER REVOLT 823
by all the great powers in regard to trade with China, and commun-
icated what he had done to France, Italy, and Japan. The reply
of England was favorable, but the other powers con-
fined themselves to generalities. The incident called at- Sfy>s ?"**
tention to the danger threatening the empire and aroused c^A
the keenest interest of China herself.
The Chinese government was supine, but the people were outraged.
Their religion, patriotism, and business interests cried out against
what they saw. Then arose the society of Boxers in the
provinces of Shantung and Chili, nominally an athletic
organization, but secretly pledged to exterminate the
foreigners. Led by Prince Tuan, they became very numerous, won
the support of many of the imperial troops, and by the middle of
1900 held all the country between Peking and the sea. The govern-
ment was overwhelmed and June 10 placed Prince Tuan at the head
of the foreign office. On the igth the foreign ministers were ordered
to leave the country, but they dared not trust themselves in the seeth-
ing masses who held the roads to the coast. Baron von Ketteler,
German ambassador, going through the streets of Peking to deliver
a protest in the name of his government, was set on by a mob and
killed by a soldier in uniform. Instantly came a furious demand for
the blood of the foreigners in the city. All of the latter, ministers
and others, with some native Christians, assembled at the British
embassy and constructed fortifications. The Chinese government
gave no relief. It was as helpless as the foreigners, and from June
20 until August 14 the embassy was in a state of siege.
By the middle of June the powers had decided to rescue their min-
isters. On the i yth they took Taku at the head of the gulf of Pechili
and 130 miles from the capital; and 20,000 troops, Jap-
anese, Russian, British, American, and French, were in the jj™1*^
place when they learned on July 9 of the death of the china! *
German ambassador. They were quickly in motion and
five days later took the walled city of Tientsin, 40 miles from the coast.
News now came that all the ministers in Peking were dead, and the
column halted while the foreign powers prepared to send a great army
for the severe chastisement of China. This thoroughly alarmed the
Chinese government, which appealed to the United States, as a power
not interested in seizing territory, to avert the threatened invasion.
On the same day came assurances that the ministers were alive.
This appeal came safely through the swarms of Boxers that filled the
roads, and reached President McKinley on July 20. Instantly the
force at Tientsin was in motion, and August 14 it occupied Peking, the
imperial court fleeing into the interior.
At first the situation seemed to hasten partition, for each nation
concerned, including Germany, was likely to make strong demands
which China could not resist. Secretary Hay, holding still to his
824 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
"open-door" policy, thought to avoid such a result by getting the
powers to agree to joint occupation until reparation was arranged.
He shrewdly assumed that mutual jealousies which have
?&ys. predominated in many joint negotiations would prevent
Effort for any one Power f rom gettmg a share of the empire for itself.
China. He got all the powers concerned to accept joint occupa-
tion. Then he got England and Germany to agree not
to ask for territory, to oppose such a demand from the others, and to
favor an "open-door" policy in commerce. The other powers now
could only assent, Russia and France in a half-hearted way. At the
final signature of this agreement the United States in a special clause
stipulated that they did not guarantee the integrity of the foreign
powers in China.
Joint diplomacy now proceeded. In December, 1900, it presented
its demands to China, — indemnity for the losses sustained, and meas-
ures for the future security of foreigners. China hesi-
from China tated a long time, but finally agreed to pay 450,000,000
taels — about $333,000,000 — distributed among the
powers in a specified manner. At every step Secretary Hay urged
that China should not be reduced to the position of a weak power.
He believed that the best solution of the Eastern problem was to main-
tain her integrity and give her an opportunity to modernize herself.
Our share of the indemnity was $24,000,000 ; but this exceeded the
actual losses by $13,000,000, and in 1907 the excess was handed back
as an act of good will.
The United States now proceeded to try to get trade privileges in
China and managed to have Antung and Mukden declared open ports.
But these towns were in Manchuria where Russia was
Manchuria see^mg to establish her influence. Spite of treaty stipu-
lations, by which she had agreed to evacuate the province
by 1903, she held on to her advantage, returning evasive answers to
Hay's representations. When we could do no more, the controversy
was taken up by Japan, who had concessions in Manchuria which
were violated by the Russian occupation. Still Russia did not yield,
and Japan sent an ultimatum demanding concessions by January 16,
1904. It was not respected, and on February 10 began a short and
brilliant war in which Japan surprised the world by her victories, so
that by midsummer the great Slavic nation was ready to treat for
peace. Until this time American sympathy was with Japan, and
when President Roosevelt succeeded in bringing the two
p nations to treat for peace at Portsmouth, New Hampshire,
on August 5, 1904, she expected American support. To
her surprise the American president now seemed to favor
her antagonist. Her finances were exhausted and she was forced to
consent to the Russian retention of the northern half of Saghalien, all
of which she had demanded for indemnity. Her representatives went
home feeling that we were jealous of her rising power in the Pacific.
THE CONTROL OF SEAPORTS 825
THE ALASKAN BOUNDARY
The Alaskan boundary controversy between the United States and
Great Britain arose because of indefinite terms in the purchase treaty
of 1867. The region involved was unsettled and no one Qrf .
then felt the need of an adjustment. But in 1897 gold
was discovered in the upper Yukon valley, the Alaskan region was
flooded with miners, disputes as to jurisdiction arose, and both sides
sought arbitration. January 24, 1903, six arbiters, three Americans
and three Englishmen, were appointed to settle the dispute. Of the
latter, two were Canadians, who were expected to favor the British
contention, but the third was Lord Alverstone, chief justice of Eng-
land, in whose unbiased judgment the Americans had confidence.
The tribunal met in London, September 3, 1903.
The point at issue was the interpretation of the treaty made by
Russia and England, in 1825, fixing the boundary between Alaska
and the British possessions. It was therein provided that The Iggue
the line should begin at the south of Prince of Wales island,
ascend northward with the Portland channel to the 5oth parallel,
then follow the summit of the mountains that were supposed to skirt
the coast to longitude 141° west, and thence with this parallel to the
Arctic ocean. But if the summits of the mountains were not ascer-
tainable, the line was not to run more than ten marine leagues from
the coast. Investigation showed that no mountains were where they
had been thought to be and the coast was cut by deep indentations.
Then arose this question : should the line pass across the indentations,
leaving their heads to the east of it, or should it curve ten leagues
eastward so as to leave the heads of the indentations to the westward.
If the former view prevailed, Dyea, Juneau, and other ports from
which started the roads to the Yukon would be left in British hands.
There was no contention over the part of the line which followed
longitude 141° to the Arctic ocean.
The Americans believed they had a strong case and supported it
before the tribunal with a mass of maps and other evidence to show
that in the treaty of 1825 it was Russia's intention to ex-
elude England from the western shore above 54° 40', and
that the design was at last accepted by England. Lord
Alverstone was satisfied with these arguments, and in all important
votes sided with the Americans, leaving his two associates in a mi-
nority. They were both unconvinced and went home in disappoint-
ment. They and their countrymen felt that the interests of Canada
had been sacrificed to promote the newly awakened harmony be-
tween the United States and Great Britain. The line run in accord-
ance with the treaty was not so far eastward as we claimed, but it
left Canada no point of access to the sea within the disputed region,
826 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
and gave us control of the routes to the Yukon. As to the goldfields,
the richest of them are on the Canadian side of the line, on its northern
stretch.
THE NEW MONROE DOCTRINE
Since the Venezuelan incident, 1895, events have tended still
further to strengthen the new Monroe doctrine. Getting a foothold
on the Isthmus of Panama brings the American influence
A New mto ciose relation with the states near that important
point. The doctrine, which originally meant opposition
to European control and was extended by Cleveland to the assump-
tion of a degree of protection, has of late been extended into a species
of moral guardianship by which we undertake to compel a Spanish-
American state to fulfill its obligations and give Europeans no ground
for interference. In this last stage the doctrine has become so vast
a force in our external relations that it may well demand our most
careful consideration lest we exercise it selfishly and without a due
sense of the obligations it imposes on us to be just and generous. In
1899 the United States were represented at the first Hague confer-
ence, called to consider the peaceful settlement of international dis-
putes. Their delegates joined in all that was done to promote the
aims of the meeting, but in accepting the deliberation stated distinctly
that their country did not give up the Monroe doctrine, for three-
quarters of a century a cardinal feature of its foreign policy. This
was notice of the most formal kind to all the world, and as no nation
represented at the conference protested, it was assumed that all
acquiesced in our claim.
Two years later the world saw it recognized in a specific manner by
one of the most aggressive of the great nations. Germany had a
grievance against Venezuela on account of unpaid public
Germany debts to German citizens. She prepared to use force,
Venezuela. but before doing so informed the United States that she
did not intend to acquire Venezuelan territory. No
objection was made, and she established, in conjunction with Great
Britain, who also had claims, a blockade of Venezuelan ports and
seized Venezuelan gunboats. After this situation had lasted a
year, the United States used their influence and induced Venezuela
to settle with her adversaries. The claims were recognized in prin-
ciple and referred to a commission for examination, the similar claims
of other nations being included at the request of President Castro.
The total amount thus demanded was 190,676,670 bolivars
($38,000,000), and of these the commission pronounced as genuine
claims amounting to 38,429,376 bolivars. It was a source of humilia-
tion to us that of the 81,410,952 bolivars demanded by our own
citizens only 2,313,711 were allowed. In connection with this affair
President Roosevelt asserted that coercing an American state did not
SANTO DOMINGAN REVENUES 827
violate the Monroe doctrine unless the acquisition of territory was
contemplated.
In 1904 Santo Domingo was bankrupt and European creditor na-
tions were thinking of interfering. Roosevelt could not object in
view of his own former opinion, but he feared that the re-
currence of interference would lead to difficulties. He President
met the situation by declaring that the United States f^alSo
were bound, in order to preserve the intent of the Monroe Domingo°
doctrine, to see that the small American states did not
give cause for interference. He proposed, therefore, to take charge
of the Dominican revenues and manage them until the financial em-
barrassments were discharged. The creditors desired such action,
Santo Domingo requested it, and he sent to the senate a treaty em-
bodying his purpose. It guaranteed the integrity of Santo Domingo,
appointed a receiver of her revenues, and agreed to settle her obli-
gations, domestic as well as foreign. This was a long step toward
control ; and the senate on that ground rejected the treaty. Then
the Dominican republic signed a modus vivendi by which it placed its
revenues in the hands of a receiver unofficially recommended by
President Roosevelt. The senate was not able to prevent this, and
as the arrangement was liable to bring complications, they decided to
accept the modus vivendi. A revised treaty was signed, omitting
the guarantee of territory, but providing for a receiver under American
protection and stipulating that Santo Domingo should not increase
her debt without American consent. This was in 1907, by which time
a great improvement had already occurred in Dominican finances.
The debt was now only $17,000,000, and under economical manage-
ment it has been steadily reduced. The incident passed without
creating the dreaded precedent for territorial expansion ; but it
strengthened and gave sharper outlines to the policy of wise restraint
of our southern neighbors, to which the Monroe doctrine seems to
be tending.
The election of 1900 was a test of opinion on the war and expan-
sion. The republicans renominated McKinley without opposition.
Theodore Roosevelt, by the artifice of T. C. Platt, was
made the candidate for the vice-presidency in order to McKhJey
remove him from New York politics. The democrats
renominated Bryan, who relaxed his free silver demands on the ground
that the discovery of gold in Alaska had produced an abundant supply
of money. The campaign turned on expansion. McKinley was
chosen by 292 to 155 electoral votes. It was evident that the people
were satisfied at the prospect of playing a new role in world affairs.
In such a progress the victor at the polls was to have no part.
September 14, 1901, he died from the effect of a shot by a crazed
anarchist whom he encountered at the Buffalo exposition.
828 EXPANSION AND ITS PROBLEMS
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
Besides the references in chapter XXXVIII to the conquest of the Philippines,
the following books, mostly on the government of dependencies, are very useful :
Latane", America as a World Power (1907); Schurman, Philippine Affairs (1902);
Foreman, Philippine Islands (1906) ; Barrows, History of the Philippines (1908) ;
Willis, Our Philippine Problem (1905) ; and Blount, American Occupation of the
Philippines (1912), opposed to American occupation.
On the government of dependencies see : Willoughby, Territories and Dependen-
cies (1905) ; Randolph, Law and Policy of Annexation (1901) ; Willis, Our Philip-
pine Problem (1905) ; Rowe, Establishment of Civil Government in the Philippines
(1902) ; and Younghusband, The Philippines and Round About (1899). See also :
Annual Reports of the Secretary of War, 1899-1903, contains a valuable collection
of facts relating to the first five years of American control in the Philippines, Porto
Rico, Hawaii, Cuba, and Guam. The reports of the Bureau of Insular Affairs also
contain much valuable information.
On affairs in the Far East see : Rockhill, Report on Affairs in China (in Foreign
Relations, Appendix, 1901) ; and House Documents, 56 Cong, i ses. No. 547, for
facts relating to Secretary Hay's negotiations in China. The following are of
service : Reinsch, World Politics at the End of the Nineteenth Century (1900) ; Mahan,
The Problem of Asia (1900) ; Callahan, American Relations in the Pacific (1900) ;
Foster, American Diplomacy in the Orient (1903) ; Weale, Reshaping the Far East
(1905) ; and Millard, America and the Far Eastern Question (1909).
On Panama and the isthmian canal see the following general works : Sparks,
National Development (1907) ; Dewey, National Problems (1907) ; Latane, America
as a World Power (1907); and Peck, Twenty Years of the Republic (1907). The
bibliographies in these volumes contain many references to valuable works on
the subject. On the Nicaraguan canal project see : Keasby, The Nicaragua Canal
and the Monroe Doctrine (1896) ; and Latane, Diplomatic Relations of the United
States and Spanish America (1900). On Panama see: Johnson, Four Centuries of
the Panama Canal (1906) ; and the report of the Commission d'etude institue par le
liquidateur de la Compagnie Universelle (1890). See also Travis, The Clayton-
Bulwer Treaty (1899).
For Independent Reading
Morton, The Siege of Peking (1900) ; Kausse, Story of the Chinese Crisis (1900) ;
Little, The Far East (1905) ; Asakawa, The Russo-Japanese Conflict (1904) ; Young-
husband, The Philippines and Round About (1899) J Weale, The Truce in the East
and its Aftermath (1907) ; and Foster, Diplomatic Memoirs (1909).
CHAPTER XL
THE ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
ROOSEVELT'S CORPORATION POLICY
PRESIDENT MCKINLEY died September 14, 1901. His successor re-
tained the existing cabinet and announced that he would follow the
policy of his predecessor. To observing men the promise
seemed difficult of fulfillment. The two men were essen- Ro°scvelt
tially unlike in personality and ideals. One was a man of McKinley.
gentle habits, a tactful politician who had achieved power
because he had the faculty of binding up opposing interests. The
other was aggressive by nature, a reformer who had forced his accept-
ance by party leaders because of his blunt way of winning the con-
fidence of the people. McKinley, the protectionist and friend of
Mark Hanna, had the confidence of the capitalists and the support
of the party organization. Roosevelt, the reformer, although an
avowed protectionist, had made a reputation as an opponent of party
machines.
There was, however, evidence that McKinley in his last days had
come to a new position in regard to the tariff. In his last public
speech, at Buffalo, September 5, he said: "The period of
exclusiveness is past. The expansion of our trade and
commerce is the pressing problem. Commercial wars are p0iicy.
unprofitable. A policy of good- will and friendly trade
relations will prevent reprisals. Reciprocity treaties are in harmony
with the spirit of the times ; measures of retaliation are not. If, per-
chance, some of our tariffs are no longer needed for revenue or to en-
courage and protect some of our industries at home, why should they
not be employed to extend and promote our markets abroad ?" This
utterance was taken at the time to indicate the advent of a new era in
the tariff. In what practical manner it would have been applied, the
world never knew. Roosevelt was not a tariff reformer. In his
messages to congress he made it plain that he upheld protection, al-
though he gave a pale indorsement to reciprocity. He said it was a
mistake to say the tariff was responsible for the trusts.
His first message showed that he considered the relation of the
government to trusts the great question of the hour. He declared
that corporations existed by permission of law, state or national, and
demanded that they value their property honestly and deal fairly
829
830 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
by the public in marketing their stock. He thought they should be
taken under federal control, and recommended the creation of a de-
partment of commerce and industry under which they should exercise
their functions. In this position he seemed to manifest po-
andSTrusts. litical insight. Bryan, leading the democrats, had continu-
ally asked that trusts be destroyed : Roosevelt asked that
they be legalized under restraint analogous to the supervision of rail-
roads by the interstate commerce commission. If the corporations
would accept this policy, the conservative opponents of trusts, it
seemed, would be drawn into the republican party, and the democrats
would be robbed of their most popular argument. The president's
appeal to congress was futile. The proposed department was not
created, and a bill which he urged for reciprocity with Cuba died a
natural death in the senate after passing the house. Nor were the
democrats keenly alive to their opportunity. They wasted time forc-
ing an investigation of the conduct of the war in the Philippines,
thinking it would furnish them good campaign material by showing
that expansion had brought with it a train of military horrors. The
autumn congressional elections left the republicans still in power,
although their majority in the house was reduced from forty-five to
thirty. Expansion was a dead issue and was thenceforth so recognized.
To the indifference of congress the president made a characteristic
reply. He appealed to the people, thinking they would make it evi-
dent to congress what they desired done. Late in the
summer of I902 ne made a speech-making tour through
People. New England. Although it was announced as a non-
political affair, much was said about the broad questions
of citizenship, and it was evident from the earnest way in which his
views on corporations were received that he had raised a popular issue.
His frank and aggressive manner commended him to the people, who
looked on him as their champion. An admirer once said of him in
connection with this early stage of his contest : " Under the old regime
the people got the impression that it was useless to fight against the
influence of corporations and machine politics, but Roosevelt gave
them back their hope, and made them think a fight was indeed worth
while."
His position in regard to the anthracite coal strike of 1902 added to
his popularity. From May until October the miners refused to work,
demanding higher wages. The people of the East were
Strike°a terrified at the prospect of a coal famine, and prices rose
steadily. At last the president called together the mine-
owners, the representatives of the miners, and the officials of the rail-
roads carrying the coal to market, urging them to settle their difficul-
ties. The owners resented his interference and charged him with
failure to send troops to protect the mines from violence. Of this
charge he was not guilty, since the governor of Pennsylvania had re-
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR 831
fused to call for federal troops. The state officials smarted under the
imputation of neglect of duty, and the whole Pennsylvania guard was
called out for service in the mining district.
The situation now seemed desperate, and more radical people be-
gan to talk of seizing the mines and working them under government
supervision. Then Roosevelt took a more positive tone.
He called to Washington representatives of the New York c ttl d
banks which financed the mines and railroads concerned,
and induced them to use their influence to make the owners agree to
arbitration. What he would have done had they still held out does
not appear. The upshot was that the "coal trust," as the owners
were called, yielded and a committee of arbitration was named by the
president. The miners returned to work at the old wages and in the
following spring were awarded ten per cent increase of wages, half
of their original demands. The incident made Roosevelt popular
and served to call attention to the fact that the country's supply of
anthracite had fallen into the hands of a small number of men.
The annual message of 1902 was strong for federal control of cor-
porations. It attacked the system by which the corporations could
take advantage of state charters, saying: "This country
cannot afford to sit supine on the plea that under our Control of
r Ai_ Corpora-
peculiar system of government we are helpless in the tions>
presence of new conditions." The president was willing
to strengthen the constitution if it was not strong enough to deal
with the problem. His opponents replied that he was a radical and
would overthrow the constitution. His own idea was that new con-
ditions had arisen and that the people are always wise enough to make
a government which provides for their wants. Congress gave little
heed to his suggestions, but February 13, 1903, it passed the law to
create a department of commerce and labor, which began at once
collecting facts to show whether or not the trusts had sought to stifle
competition in defiance of the Sherman anti-trust law.
The years 1901-1903 were a period of great prosperity. Business
men had been so indifferent to the law of 1800 that they seemed to
think it a dead letter. Many trusts were organized and
large quantities of "watered" stock were issued. The
most notable example was the United States Steel Cor-
poration with $1,018,000,000 capital and $301,000,000 bonds. The
rage for gigantic corporations was so great that the public could not
buy the bonds, and in 1903 the speculative market collapsed so com-
pletely that steel common sold for less than 9 per cent of par. A
shrewd observer remarked that the country was suffering from "in-
digestible securities." This collapse cooled for a time the country's
aversion to trusts ; for it was said that experience showed they could
not exist profitably. But the return of confidence was early, the
stocks rose in the market, and by adopting a more cautious policy they
832 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
began to show the great earning power in concentration. The real
point at issue was: Should this advantage accrue to the men who
effected the combination or to the people ?
The year 1904 was a presidential election year, and Roosevelt was
very strong with the country. The opposition in his own party con
centrated on Mark A. Hanna ; but he was a millionaire,
N°m£at *d and no one ^e^eve<^ ^e cou^ be elected. When he died,
i904.m February 15, 1904, all hope of naming any other conserv-
ative was abandoned, and Roosevelt was selected with-
out opposition. Charles W. Fairbanks, of Indiana, was nominated
for vice-president. The platform declared for a reasonable restriction
of trusts and declared that the tariff should be reformed by its friends.
The prospects of the democrats were gloomy. Expansion, as an
issue, had to be abandoned, there seemed to be little interest in the
tariff, and Roosevelt had so emasculated their opposition
'Pwker ^o trusts that there was little left on which they could make
bythe a Stand' The men °f the East were ful1 °f bitter recrimi-
Democrats. nations for Bryan, who had twice been defeated. All
the party's calamities, they thought, came from trusting
the "Western will-o'-the-wisp," and they demanded a return to "safe-
and-sane" policies. Bryan himself realized his inability to succeed.
He was still strong in the West and South, but his friends were willing
to give an Eastern man an opportunity. Thus it happened that Judge
Alton B. Parker, of New York, a man little known to the public, was
nominated for president and Henry G. Davis, of West Virginia, for vice-
president. The platform denounced trusts, demanded the enforce-
ment of the Sherman law, arraigned the protective tariff, and indorsed
several other minor reforms.
Then followed a whirlwind of speech-making by the republican
candidate. Wherever he went, he was received with an enthusiasm
which Parker, a man of solid worth and steady tempera-
Election ment, was not able to arouse. The latter made it very
clear that he repudiated the free coinage of silver, an action
which the Western democrats considered a direct insult to Bryan,
and many of them are supposed to have shown their resentment at the
polls. The election result was that Roosevelt carried every Northern
and Western state and broke the traditional "solid South" by
securing the vote of Missouri. The " safe-and-sane " man of the East
had been defeated more decisively than Bryan in either of the previous
canvasses.
ROOSEVELT'S SECOND TERM
His overwhelming election naturally gave Roosevelt confidence in
his position, and he was not the man to use the advantage moderately.
The house, strongly republican, felt the effects of his popularity and
was inclined to support him in most of his measures. But the senate
RAILROAD RATES 833
contained many enemies, members of his own party, who wished to
check what they considered his overreaching ambition. They had
their opportunity when, late in 1904, he sent them treaties
providing that future disputes between the United States Ro°s*velt
and certain other powers might by agreements made senate!
with the power^ concerned be referred to the Hague tri-
bunal for settlement. Such agreements would be negotiated by the
president, and to adopt the suggestion would greatly increase his power.
The senators were in no mood to diminish their treaty-making power,
and amended the project by inserting the word "treaties" instead of
" agreements. " The president dropped the projected reform. He was
deeply offended, and wrote a stinging letter to the chairman of the
senate foreign committee. The breach between him and his opponents
was materially widened.
The immediate reform on which the president had now set his
heart was to enlarge the powers of the interstate commerce commis-
sion so that it might fix maximum rates, and deliver
effective judgments on matters within its jurisdiction.
Congress did not accept the suggestion. During the
summer he made many speeches throughout the country, and in all of
them spoke for railroad regulation. Much interest was manifested,
and in his next annual message the subject was brought up with
emphasis. The result was the Hepburn rate-bill, which after a long
and bitter struggle became a law June 29, 1906. It forbade rebates,
conferred rate-making power on the interstate commerce commission,
and gave the commission power to specify the manner in which rail-
roads should keep their accounts. The bill originally made final the
decisions of the commission, but the senate insisted that there should
be appeal to the courts. At this point affairs hung for a long
time, but it was finally agreed that there should be a limited review
by the courts. Roosevelt declared himself satisfied with the com-
promise.
Two other laws which passed at this session through the president's
efforts show how much the reforming temper influenced congress.
One grew out of the report of a special committee to in-
vestigate the meat-packing houses. Alarming conditions ^ttatr^dd
were found to exist, and it was now provided that no meat Products.0
should be shipped out of the state in which it was packed
without rigorous government inspection. Another law prohibited
adulteration, and required that all food sold in interstate commerce
should have correct labels. The last law has been severely resisted
by the manufacturers, but Presidents Roosevelt and Taft have uni-
formly supported its execution.
A law was also passed to prohibit corporations from contributing to
campaign funds. It was partly the result of the tremendous upheaval
of sentiment in 1905, when it was discovered that New York life in-
3H
834 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
surance companies had been making large campaign contributions.
Chauncey M. Depew, senator from New York, admitted that he re-
ceived a salary of $20,000 as director of one of the
Contritm companies, for which he rendered no considerable service,
tions. The other New York senator was largely interested in
an express company, and used his influence to prevent the
enactment of a parcels post law. Depew himself was prominently
connected, and was identified with the business control of the New
York Central Railroad. Both men were bitter opponents of
Roosevelt.
Other hostile senators were less prominently identified with monied
interests. Some of them were men of excellent character and ability,
and they undoubtedly felt that they were fighting a radical
movem£nt which had in it much that was evil. If they
theenate. could have sloughed off from their own cause certain men
acting from self-interest, and if divesting themselves of
their closest relations with capitalists they could have stood before
the country as the representatives of conservative ideas, pure and
simple, they would have had a strong support among the people. As
it was, conservatism and the defense of corporations were identified
in the popular mind. It seemed to many that the senate had ceased
to be representative of the interests of all the people. Before the Roose-
velt movement began there was a cynical feeling abroad that wealth
would control the government, whatever the feeling of the masses.
Roosevelt's fight against corporations was thus also a fight to break
down the influence of a powerful party organization. It was a war
against the bosses, both local and national. A few Western senators
supported it outright, and the democrats helped for party reasons.
One of the results was a demand for a constitutional amendment for
the election of senators by the people, a measure which several times
passed the house only to be lost in the senate itself.
Meanwhile, the president continued his campaign against the trusts.
He was an excellent fighter, and he attacked with fervor. He was met
with a storm of denunciation, which did not stop short of
?ndSpublic attacking h*5 veracity. He was said to be drunk with the
Opinion. ^ust ^or P^wer and to be afflicted with an inordinate opin-
ion of his own importance. As usually happens with a
popular leader, he was cordially hated by those he opposed, and blindly
trusted by those who believed that he was, spite of his personal short-
comings, the only hope of the cause they felt so important. In this
state of affairs, it was not possible to get important reforms through
congress, but the popular opinion steadily grew in favor of reform.
Gradually the leaders of the senate opposition began to be retired in
favor of less hostile men, although those who were left showed no signs
of yielding to the coming storm.
The approach of the year 1908, a presidential election year, was
ELECTION OF 1908 835
watched anxiously by both factions. Roosevelt had announced that
he would not accept reelection, and his opponents hoped
to put into the presidency a man of less extreme views.
He himself was concerned that his successor should be
one who would not relax the combat he had carried forward. The
man he favored was William H. Taft, formerly governor of the Philip-
pines, and in 1908 secretary of war. He was known as an honest
administrator, a man of excellent mental ability and fine personal
character. He was a Roosevelt man, and had the entire confidence of
the reformers. The opposing faction had no man who could command
united support, and they resorted to the " favorite-son " expedient.
Their total strength was not considerable, and with the president's
support Taft was easily nominated for first place when the republican
convention assembled at Chicago, June 16, 1908. James S. Sherman,
of New York, in sympathy with the conservatives, was named for vice-
president. On the trust question the platform was all that Roosevelt
desired. It demanded that the law of 1890 should be amended to give
the federal government greater control over corporations engaged in
interstate trade. It also declared for a revision of the tariff in a special
session of congress immediately after the inauguration of the next
president. Possibly this measure was supported in some quarters by
those who thought that bringing forward the tariff question would
lessen the intensity of the struggle against trusts ; but it was evident
that there was a growing popular feeling that the tariff should be
lowered.
Let us now turn to the democrats. The overwhelming defeat of
Parker in 1904 disposed, for a time, of the idea that the old Cleveland
alignment could be restored, and pointed to the recovery
by Bryan of his former position in the party. The East Dominated
still viewed him with disfavor, but the West and the South
were loyal. His two defeats were undoubtedly a handicap, but if
Bryanism was to control, who was a stronger leader than Bryan him-
self ? His power was seen in the selection of Denver for the conven-
tion city, and when the convention was organized, July 7, his friends
were in control. His opponents were so weak that he was nominated
on the first ballot, with 888J of the 994 votes cast. John W. Kern, of
Indiana, was nominated for vice-president. The platform was long,
but it announced the traditional Bryan policies.
As formerly, there were several minor parties, each of which nomi-
nated candidates. The most significant was the socialist party, which
named for its leaders Eugene V. Debs, of Indiana, and
. Benjamin Hanford, of New York. Here also came to its Jdates *
culmination the Hearst movement, which for several years
had attracted much attention. It was originated by William R.
Hearst, a wealthy owner of many newspapers. He first appeared as
a democrat, and organized an "independence league" as his peculiar
836 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
weapon of attack on the party organization. He made himself feared,
and in 1905 was nearly elected mayor of New York on an anti-Tam-
many ticket. In 1906 he was an independent candidate for governor
of New York, but was defeated by Governor Hughes after an exciting
campaign. In 1908 he cast off all semblance of democracy, organized
the independence party, with Thomas L. Hisgen as the candidate.
The attitude of Roosevelt was sharp and bitter. January 31,
1908, he sent congress a special message which was nothing less
than a manifesto intended, as it seems, to rally his sup-
Porters in view of the coming struggle. The Standard Oil
Foes. Company had been indicted as a result of the investiga-
tions of the newly established department of commerce
and labor. It was shown that it had received rebates from a railroad
in Illinois, and the jury rendered an adverse verdict. Judge Landis
imposed fines for the several specific violations alleged, amounting to
more than $29,000,000. It was believed to be an extreme punish-
ment, and was set aside by the United States Circuit Court of
Appeals, on the ground that it was excessive. But it showed that a
great corporation could be brought to justice. In the message of
January, 1908, the president referred to the matter in severe terms.
The company, he said, had given out an ingenious and untruthful
defense of its action. For his enemies he had, also, vehement words.
He spoke bitterly of the representative of "wealth accumulated on a
giant scale by all forms of iniquity, ranging from the oppression of
wage workers to the unfair and unwholesome methods of crushing out
competition, and to defrauding the public by stock-jobbing and the
manipulating of securities." " Certain wealthy men of this stamp,"
he continued, "have banded together for a work of reaction. Their
work is to overthrow and discredit all who honestly administer the law,
to prevent any additional legislation which would check and restrain
them." At this same time he professed to discriminate carefully
between the rich men who obeyed and those who defied the law. Dur-
ing the campaign of 1908 Taft gave no evidence that he did not ap-
prove of this strong onslaught on the foes of the existing administration.
By this time Roosevelt had many opponents in the newspaper world.
The great city dailies are ordinarily million-dollar enterprises, and are
necessarily in close connection with the capitalists. It was, therefore,
natural that they were among his opponents. On the other hand, the
country press was largely sympathetic. The arguments of both sides
were exaggerated. To many quiet persons it seemed that Roosevelt
sought to arouse the poor against the rich, and they considered this
beneath the dignity of a president of the United States. Many others
looked upon him as the only hope of restoring the government to the
people, and they tolerated his vigorous methods as the natural ex-
pressions of a strong-willed man.
In the beginning of the campaign both Taft and Bryan proposed to
REPUBLICAN PARTY DIVISIONS 837
refrain from public speaking, but the people were so insistent that
they gave up their design. During the last two months of
the campaign both candidates spoke frequently and to Jf, ^g
large audiences. Bryan's reception was enthusiastic, but
the spirit of Roosevelt was behind Taft, and he was elected trium-
phantly. The democrats carried all the Southern states except
Missouri, together with Colorado, Nebraska, Nevada, and Oklahoma,
a total of 162 votes. Taft carried the rest, 321 votes. Of the minor
candidates, Debs, the socialist, had the largest popular vote, 420,890.
TAPT'S ADMINISTRATION
The last session of congress under Roosevelt was marked by a series
of messages recommending measures in keeping with his advanced
ideas, to all of which congress showed ill-disguised con-
tempt. The country greeted his successor heartily. } ??yrn*~
11 T» i f -I i i- AldnchLaw.
Although he was a Roosevelt man, he was of a mild dis-
position and it was thought he would be less irritating than his pred-
ecessor. March 15 congress met in extra session to consider the
tariff, according to the recent republican platform. The country ex-
pected reform, and the house, under the leadership of Congressman
Payne, quickly passed a bill making notable reductions. In the senate
it encountered opposition from a group popularly called " stand-
patters," led by Senator Aldrich, of Rhode Island, who were able to
raise the rates of the Payne bill. A long wrangle followed when the
bill went to a committee of conference. The result was uncertainty,
and the business world ere long demanded that the politicians settle
their contentions. Meanwhile there was much speculation about the
action of the president. He was in constant consultation with Aldrich
and other members of congress and sought to have the rates lowered.
His efforts were unavailing, and the bill as it passed was an Aldrich
victory. Many Western republican senators wished a more decided
revision, and urged Taft to apply the veto. When he finally sent his
approval they were disappointed, and charged him with going over to
the standpatters. He was undoubtedly very unwilling to prolong the
party breach Roosevelt had precipitated, and when he had once acted
felt it his duty to stand by his decision. In September, a month after
the bill became a law, he made a speech at Winona, Minnesota, in
praise of the recent tariff bill, and this further irritated the Western
men.
The Payne-Aldrich law did, in fact, divide rather than unite the
republican party. Taft said it was the best tariff law ever made by his
party, but its reductions were very slight, and it made a large portion
of the people think little could be hoped from the policy of revising
the tariff by its friends. To have vetoed it, however, would have
arrayed the majority of the party against the president and would not
838 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
have removed the uncertainty which the business community con-
sidered the worst phase of the situation. In signing it Taft thought he
had taken the less of two evils, but he soon found that the insurgents,
as the Western men now began to be called, were capable of severe
hostility. They were not numerous, but by combining with the
democrats they could make much trouble for the admins tration.
A significant feature of the bill was a tax of one per cent on the in-
come of corporations whose net earnings exceeded $5000. It was to
yield a considerable revenue, but its greatest importance
Corporation wag ^^ «t recognized the principle that congress could
tax the great corporations. Taft wished, also, to tax the
incomes of individuals, but was restrained because the supreme court
had decided that the income tax of 1894 was unconstitutional. He
contented himself with suggesting that congress submit to the states
an amendment permitting such a tax. Congress acquiesced, and in
1913 the desired amendment was accepted by the necessary number of
states.
In August, 1909, Gifford Pinchot,head of the forestry bureau, depart-
ment of the interior, attacked his superior, Secretary Ballinger, for re-
opening for sale certain lands which had been withdrawn
andPtachot ^Y Roosevelt. Ballinger was also charged with unduly
favoring the rich Cunningham syndicate in regard to the
patents of valuable coal lands in Alaska. After an investigation, Taft
supported Ballinger. Pinchot was in sympathy with the insurgents,
and was an old Roosevelt supporter. His friends took up the quarrel,
which became so bitter that at Taft's suggestion an investigating
committee was appointed. Before it reported, Pinchot wrote an out-
spoken letter, in which he condemned the secretary and was at once
dismissed, January 7, 1910. The committee exonerated Ballinger by
a partisan vote. Later investigations, however, resulted in canceling
the Cunningham claims. The Ballinger-Pinchot controversy added
to the discontent of the insurgents, and promoted the belief that Presi-
dent Taft was not a good judge of men.
In the spring of 1910 insurgency won its first notable victory, and
at the same time broke the overweening power of the speaker. The
authority of this officer rested on his right to appoint the
h°use committees and on his membership on the rules
Speaker. committee, which by reporting new rules as exigency de-
manded controlled legislation. Reed, who filled the office
from 1889 to 1891, and 1895-1899, had held these powers, but he was a
broad-minded man and used them for the general good. Cannon,
speaker from 1903-1911, was a clever and relentless exponent of the
standpat doctrines, and was bent on perpetuating his control over
legislation. Under him the speaker was chosen by a small number of
kindred spirits who were rewarded by important committee assign-
ments. To many protests against the system he replied that he was
AN INSURGENT VICTORY 839
the servant of the house, which could remove him whenever it saw fit.
In truth, he was responsible to a majority of the party caucus, and
could only be removed when the caucus so decided or when a group of
the majority party united with the minority party, in ordinary times
an unlikely occurrence.
But 1910 was not an ordinary time. The insurgents, goaded by the
speaker's attempts to punish them for their resistance, were willing to
unite with the democrats to break the tyranny from which
they suffered. March 19 they introduced a resolution to
enlarge the rules committee from five to fifteen members
and to leave their appointment to the house. Objection was made
that the resolution was out of order. Cannon knew the insurgents
expected the support of the democrats, and refused to pass on the point
of order until he was sure of a majority. The session was prolonged
through the night in fruitless wrangling, and then the house adjourned
for a day. But the insurgents resisted all overtures, and when Cannon
again faced the house he was defeated. He ruled that the insurgent
motion was out of order, and was promptly reversed by his allied foes.
A new rule was promptly adopted, eliminating the speaker from the
rules committee, enlarging it to ten members, and providing that it be
chosen by the house. In the moment of defeat the speaker announced
that he would entertain a motion to vacate the chair. A democrat
moved his dismissal, but enough insurgents voted in the negative to
defeat the motion. Cannon was thus retained in the chair, but was
shorn of his great power. The rule of the house "oligarchy" was
broken, and in the future a mere majority, by amending the rules when
it sees fit, can carry through the measures it desires. The next house
was democratic. It maintained the advance gained in March, 1910,
and further reduced the speaker's authority by leaving the selection of
committees to the house itself, each party nominating a portion in
caucus.
Meanwhile, the president urged several important measures on
congress, some of which became laws. A commerce court was created
with authority to pass upon cases investigated by the inter-
state commerce commission, postal saving banks were Measures
established, a law was passed requiring the publication of
the campaign expenses of candidates for congress, and the powers of the
interstate commerce commission were enlarged in a new railroad bill.
The insurgents supported all these bills but the last, which they
thought too lax. A measure recommended by Taft for the federal
incorporation of interstate corporations was allowed to die in its early
stages, the opposition being, apparently, on the part of the regulars.
During the same year public interest was stimulated by a common out-
cry against high prices. There was an attempted boycott of the so-
called "meat trust" and a futile prosecution of the National Meat
Packing Company. The "interests," it was said, were intrenched
840 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
behind the political machines, and in many sections nominating pri-
maries were demanded. Governor Hughes, of New York, a leader of
the liberals, took up the fight against the machine in a campaign to
secure an efficient primary law. Defeated by the regulars in the state
legislature, he called the assembly back for an extra session, but even
this expedient was unsuccessful.
In this condition of popular unrest the autumn elections were held,
and the result was republican defeat. The democrats carried the
house by a majority of sixty-seven, and elected governors
cratkHouse. in ^e usually republican states of New York, Ohio, New
" Jersey, Massachusetts, and Connecticut. It was a rebuke
to the party of Cannon and Aldrich, and President Taft, who could not
well repudiate his political friends, was involved in their disaster.
Let us now return to Roosevelt. March 23, 1909, he set out on an
expedition to bunt big game in Africa. His actions were kept before
, the country by a vigilant newspaper press, even while he
Return S was m ^e most inaccessible jungles of the Dark Continent.
March 21, 1910, he emerged from the jungles and reached
Khartum, returning to the United States by way of Europe, where he
was entertained by princes and statesmen. He arrived at New York
in June and received a tremendous demonstration of welcome. His
old friends were now prominent insurgents and urged him to enter
politics in their behalf. Outwardly he expressed friendship for Taft,
but he threw himself with energy into the campaign in New York.
He was able to control the republican convention of the state, deliver-
ing a stinging defeat to the party organization under Barnes. His
candidate for governor was Henry L, Stimson, who had risen into prom-
inence by conducting an able prosecution of the Sugar Trust. But
the defeated machine proved indifferent to Stimson, who was defeated
by Dix, the democratic candidate. Roosevelt's enemies, among them
the leading New York dailies, joyfully declared that he was eliminated
as a political leader.
The elections in the West had not injured the standing of the insur-
gents, and they came to the capital when congress assembled in Decem-
ber as pleased as the democrats. Taft, though he felt the rebuke he
had received, bore himself with dignity. His message suggested a
suspension of plans to regulate corporations until the operation of laws
already in force could be observed. He seems to have had in mind
suits recently brought against several trusts, among them the Stand-
ard Oil and the American Tobacco companies. This suggestion was
well received by business men, but the insurgents looked at it with
suspicion.
January 26, 1911, the president sent congress the outline of a Cana-
dian reciprocity treaty. It provided for lower duties or none at all on
many food products and some manufactured articles, and in return
it was expected that Canada would make similar concessions on Ameri-
DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP 841
can agricultural implements as well as on other commodities. The
large portion of the public who favored lower rates hailed the treaty
with pleasure. Some saw in it cheaper food products and
others an entering wedge for general tariff reform. The
insurgents opposed it on the ground that it sacrificed the
grain-growing Northwest in behalf of the East. They could not prevent
its passage in the house, but defeated it by diligent obstruction in the
senate. Taft, however, called an extra session of the new congress,
in which the democrats controlled the house and nearly controlled the
senate.
The situation was now unusual. A republican president was ask-
ing for a reduction of tariff rates under the guise of reciprocity and his
only hope of success was the acquiescence of his opponents.
But the situation was equally delicate for the democrats. D *mocrats
On the wave of a popular upheaval all their hopes for 1912
depended on handling wisely the measures then in hand. If they
angered the insurgents and drove them back to the regular republicans,
their affairs would be confused in the upper house. In this dilemma
they found an able leader in Oscar W. Underwood, of Alabama, chair-
man of the ways and means committee. His plan was to accept Cana-
dian reciprocity, which his own majority could carry through the house
and which would be passed through the senate by the democrats and
the Taft republicans. To offset the displeasure of the insurgents he
would pass other bills lowering rates on articles manufactured in the
East, which the democrats and insurgents acting together could carry
through the senate. It is true the latter bills might be vetoed by Taft,
but that would only put the onus of blame on the regular republicans
and give the democrats a fair ground of combat in the struggle of 1912.
The scheme was well conceived, and was carried through success-
fully. Canadian reciprocity was enacted, and close after it came a
"farmers' free list bill," then a woollens bill, and a cotton
schedule bill. All but the first were vetoed on the ground
that they were not scientifically drawn. A tariff com-
mission was a feature of the Payne-Aldrich act, and Taft announced
that he awaited its report. The democrats replied that laying taxes
was a high function of government confided by the constitution to con-
gress with careful restrictions, and that it ought not to be left to the
determination of a small number of men, however expert they were in
finance.
When the extra session adjourned August 22, 1911, Taft seemed to
be in a good position politically. His reciprocity measure was the
greatest tariff concession a president had wrung from the .
party of protection. His friends felt that time would Rejected.*7
justify its wisdom, and wipe out the unpopularity that arose
from the Payne-Aldrich law. September 21 all these hopes fell with
the announcement that Canada had defeated reciprocity. The action
842 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
was partly due to the growing influence of manufactures in Canada, and
partly to the feeling that reciprocity would make the country depend-
ent economically on the United States. The latter idea was unduly
emphasized by the Canadian protectionists, who found support in
careless utterances by the American speaker, Champ Clark, and even
by President Taft himself.
The regulars received in 1911 another hard blow in the investiga-
tion of the charges that in 1910 Senator Lorimer, of Illinois, secured
his seat through bribery. An investigation was conducted by the
senate, which decided that, although money had been spent, about
$100,000, the beneficiary had not spent it, and should keep his seat.
The verdict did not satisfy the people, who believed that an election
secured by bribery should be vacated, even though the man elected
had not furnished the money. The party organization in Illinois,
with which Lorimer was closely identified, supported Taft, and this
caused the president's opponents to say that he associated with the
Illinois bribers. The charges against the senator were renewed and
in 1912 his election was declared invalid.
In the spring of 1911 the suits brought in 1909 against the Standard
Oil and American Tobacco companies were decided against the com-
panies by the supreme court, and these two trusts were ordered to dis-
solve under a plan to be approved by the court. The parts out of
which the companies were originally made up had lost their identity,
and it was decided to divide each mammoth whole into certain com-
panies, distributing the shares of stock as well as the property. This
arrangement, it was thought, would secure a return of competition.
Keen observers, however, realized that the resultant companies would
be owned by persons who formerly owned the trusts and who had
learned the advantages of cooperation. They prophesied that the plan
would not secure effective competition. Their view seemed supported
by the announcement that several other trusts in danger of prosecution
were about to ask the courts to be allowed, to dissolve under the same
plan. Undoubtedly the trusts were suffering from the uncertainty of
the situation before them and would gladly accept the proposed escape
from it. Further confirmation of this view was seen when the stocks
of the resultant oil and tobacco companies rose steadily in the market.
Taft, who at first was inclined to accept the prescribed dissolution as a
remedy for the existing trust problem, ioon :ound that it added little
to his standing as a public leader.
The most important work of congress in 1912 was the passage by
democrats and progressives of several tariff bills which the president
vetoed. They related to the sugar, steel, wool, chemical,
and cotton schedules, and to the excise. A bill to continue
the tariff board was defeated. Other bills passed and ap-
proved are mentioned below (see page 851). A bill to require news-
papers to disclose their ownership in order that the public may know
LEADERSHIP OF THE INSURGENTS 843
what interests have relations to their policies was introduced and was
passed when it was incorporated in the post-office appropriation bill.
A bill to repeal the commerce court was passed, but met a presidential
veto. The court has become unpopular because by it the interstate
commerce commission is denied full jurisdiction over matters which
come before it. Provision to kill the court was introduced into the
legislative, executive, and judicial appropriation bill, but this was
vetoed on the ground that a rider should not be attached to such a bill.
This appropriation bill was finally passed without the objectionable
rider, and the commerce court was continued until after March 3,
1913 ; but no further funds were voted for the court. During the
year an investigation was begun of the official conduct of District
Judge Hanford, of Washington, but the judge resigned before it came
to a hearing. Impeachment proceedings were instituted against
Judge Archbald, of the commerce court, and he was convicted, the
charge being that he accepted money from parties having cases before
his court. In the short session, 191 2-1913, an immigration bill passed
congress but was vetoed because it provided a literacy test for naturali-
zation.
THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF 1912
Three republicans played important parts in the campaign of 1912,
Taft, Roosevelt, and Senator La Follette, of Wisconsin. The last
mentioned, called by admirers "Battling Bob," came into LaFollettc
prominence as an antagonist of the regular Wisconsin
republicans led by Senator Spooner. By earnest appeals to the people
he drove Spooner into retirement and established direct primaries
and public control of railroads in his state. Securing a seat in the
senate in 1906, he showed himself a tireless opponent of the Taft
regulars, and in 1911 was considered a likely Western candidate
for the presidential nomination. His views were too advanced
for the East, and it was conceded that he would not take the
prize away from Taft ; but it was thought that if the latter were
defeated at the polls, La Follette would be a man to be reckoned
with in the future.
The Eastern insurgents accepted his leadership with some hesitation,
for they thought Roosevelt a stronger man. In 1911, they organized
at Chicago a Progressive Republican League, outwardly in support of
La Follette. Similar local organizations were also widely formed.
All these were republican. Roosevelt was known to be in sympathy
with the movement, and it was whispered that he might become the
candidate of the league, displacing the Wisconsin leader. February 2,
191 2, La Follette made a violent and rambling speech at a Philadelphia
banquet. It was evident that a too strenuous canvass had overcome
his physical strength, and his friends hurried him to a sanitarium. His
collapse proved temporary, but the haste with which the Roosevelt
844 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
progressives accepted it as final suggested that they gladly took it as
an opportunity to bring forth their favorite. They so utilized the
interval of La Follette's eclipse that he could not recapture his lost
position.
February 10 seven progressive governors with seventy other prom-
inent progressives, representing twenty-four states, met to urge
Roosevelt to ;become a candidate for the republican nom-
Candidate* mation- February 14 he replied that the selection of a
candidate should be left to republicans in primaries and
that he would abide such a decision. Under existing conditions this
answer made him a candidate. Three days earlier, at Columbus,
Ohio, he had made a speech which, widely published under the title
"A Charter of Democracy," was his personal platform. It declared
for the recall of judicial decisions, asserted that the courts should not
make law, and indorsed the initiative and referendum, a short ballot,
presidential primaries, and popular election of senators. His frank
appearance in the arena brought down on him the attacks of Taft
men and democrats. Immediately after his election in 1904 he had
issued a statement that he should consider his coming administration
a second term and would not accept another nomination. That state-
ment was a source of much embarrassment before the campaign of
1912 ended.
The national republican convention was to meet at Chicago, June
1 8, and the two factions began a vigorous canvass to secure the dele-
gates. As Taft had the support of the organization men
the Bosses genera<Uy> Roosevelt demanded primaries, and when the
demand was opposed declared that his opponent was the
champion of the bosses. In fact, the old Platt machine of New York,
now led by Barnes, the old Quay machine of Pennsylvania, now led
by Penrose, the Lorimer machine of Illinois, and other less prominent
groups of party managers were for Taft ; but, nevertheless, Roosevelt's
accusation was unjust. Taft had ever stood for clean government,
and could not rid of bosses the party which had made him its leader
with the aid of Roosevelt himself.
Thirteen states employed primaries in one form or another, and
Roosevelt carried nine, Taft two, and La Follette two. In Illinois
and Ohio, Roosevelt had the popular indorsement, but
thcDdi- t?le plan in use left the selection of delegates to conven-
gates.6 ' tions chosen in the old way, and the conventions named
men not in sympathy with Roosevelt. Most of the states
having no primaries selected Taft delegates. Wherever they felt
themselves victims of wrongs the progressives named contesting dele-
gations, some of them on very weak grounds. The Southern dele-
gates, peculiarly under the influence of the officeholders, were gener-
ally for Taft. The contests first went before the national committee,
controlled by the regulars, who made up the temporary roll of the con-
BRYAN AT BALTIMORE 845
vention. Out of 254 disputed seats 235 were awarded to Taft men.
The regulars claimed the contests were insignificant, but the progres-
sives asserted that Roosevelt was the victim of fraud. The states
holding primaries had chosen 36 delegates for La Follette, 48 for Taft,
and 278 for Roosevelt. This, it was said, indicated that the republican
voters wanted Roosevelt and the machines wanted Taft. The tem-
porary roll gave the latter a majority of about 20.
July 15 the progressive leader arrived in Chicago. Asked how he
felt he replied, "Like a bull moose," from which phrase came the
nickname, "bull-moose party." When the convention
assembled Senator Root was selected for temporary chair- w *
, , , , T • i nominated,
man and made the keynote speech. A credentials com-
mittee was appointed which approved the decisions of the national
committee in reference to contests. When the progressives questioned
its report, they were defeated on a roll call. Roosevelt now advised
his friends in the convention to refrain from further participation.
On the first ballot for the nominee the result was Taft 561, Roosevelt
107, La Follette 41, scattering 19, and not voting 344. Taft was de-
clared the nominee and James S. Sherman was made the candidate for
the vice-presidency.
Republican dissensions had much interest for the democrats, who
had their own conservatives and progressives. If Roosevelt had been
the republican nominee, it would have been their interest
to nominate a conservative, since many republicans would candidates
not vote for a progressive. Under such circumstances the
conservative democrats might regain control of the party. At first
this wing seemed inclined to unite on Governor Harmon, of Ohio, who
satisfied the business men. He was not approved by the Western men,
and when this was observed sentiment shifted to Underwood, who
offered the prospect of uniting the South and East. He also was
opposed by the Western men, of whom Bryan, though not now a can-
didate, was the most influential leader. Two other prominent as-
pirants appeared, Governor Wilson, of New Jersey, and Speaker
Clark, of Missouri. Wilson was Southern born, a man of fine education,
a reformer who had fought hard against the New Jersey machine, an
eloquent speaker, and the champion of progressive ideas who, never-
theless, was likely to be more acceptable to the conservative East
than an extreme reformer like Roosevelt. Clark was also a pro-
gressive, but he had risen to prominence as an organization man,
and while he was popular as a campaign speaker, some persons
feared that his close association with the regular politicians would
take off the edge of his reforming zeal, once he was in office.
Clark's friends, however, resented the idea that he was less a pro-
gressive than Wilson. Bryan did not at first commit himself as to
the third and fourth candidate, but he was clear in his opposition to
the first and second.
846 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
When the convention met, Baltimore, June 25, each of these can-
didates had strong support without a majority. The conservatives
. were well organized, and August Belmont, a great New
Convention York banker, sat in his state's delegation, while Thomas
F. Ryan, a successful Wall Street operator, sat in the Vir-
ginia delegation. It was soon evident that the conservatives feared
Wilson most, and by agreeing with some of the Clark men they chose
Alton B. Parker temporary chairman, against the protest of Bryan,
to whom their action seemed the undoing of the work of years. They
then offered him the permanent chairmanship, but he would not bind
his hands by accepting, and the position went to Ollie James, one of
his supporters, but without a reciprocal pledge by Bryan. The East-
ern press had many times announced the elimination of Bryan from
politics, and it again assured the public that he was cleverly outplayed
in the game. But they burst into applause when, on June 29, he made
a countermove whose boldness and sagacity have rarely been equaled
in a party convention. Speaking as an individual delegate, he offered
a resolution pledging the convention to nominate no man who was
" the representative of or under obligation to" the great financial
interests and demanding the withdrawal of Belmont and Ryan from
the convention. Violent protests followed, but Bryan was not per-
turbed. He withdrew the latter part of his resolution when assured
that the gentlemen named would withdraw of their own accord, and
the first part was adopted by an overwhelming majority.
The convention proceeded to nominate candidates. On the first
ballot Clark had 440^ votes, Wilson 324, Harmon 148, Underwood
1 1 7^, and other candidates 56. Balloting continued with
^e ProDaDih"ty, as it seemed, that when at last the con-
servatives were convinced that neither the Clark nor the
Wilson men would come to either Harmon or Underwood, they would
throw the strength of these two men to Clark, which would give him
such a lead that he would secure the two-thirds vote demanded for a
nomination in a democratic convention. The New York delegation,
voting under the unit rule and dominated by Murphy, the Tammany
leader, was supposed to be directing this move, and Sullivan, leader of
the Illinois organization, and Taggart, who occupied a similar relation
to the Indiana delegation, were said to be cooperating with Murphy.
If this plan succeeded, the effect of Bryan's resolution against capital-
istic domination would be lost.
The Nebraskan watched these proceedings carefully. He was vot-
ing steadily for Clark, for whom his state's delegation was instructed,
but his personal influence was thrown for Wilson. On the
Bryan's twelfth ballot the New York delegation changed from Har-
ment.™ mon to Clark. While the fourteenth was being taken,
Bryan read a statement saying that Nebraska indorsed
Clark, thinking he was progressive and opposed to the policy for which
PROGRESSIVE PARTY FOUNDED 847
New York stood. He closed by declaring he would no longer support
New York's candidate, nor would he help nominate a man under ob-
ligations to "Morgan, Ryan, Belmont, or any other member of the
privilege-seeking, favor-hunting class." This announcement angered
the Clark men, but it found response among the Western and Southern
delegates, who for sixteen years had battled against the class that
Bryan arraigned. It checked the trend to Clark and was followed by a
rise in Wilson's vote. The time was then near midnight, Saturday,
June 29, and the convention adjourned to Monday. Clark, naturally
much exasperated, issued a denial of the charges implied in Bryan's
statement, and Bryan publicly announced that he did not doubt
Clark's good intentions but distrusted the forces combining to secure
his nomination. Many futile ballots were taken on Monday, July i.
It began to be feared that a deadlock was inevitable, and rumor said
that Bryan would propose an adjournment with a referendum. Such
a course would undoubtedly defeat the conservatives, and they re-
laxed their efforts. On the 46th ballot enough of them came to Wilson
to secure his nomination. Thomas R. Marshall, of Indiana, was
named for vice-president. The platform pledged the candidate, if
elected, to one term only.
The day after the republican convention adjourned the Roosevelt
forces in Chicago met in a mass-meeting, resolved to organize a new
party, and appointed a committee to carry out their pur-
poses. The result was a national convention at Chicago, Part^w
August 5, 1912. Eighteen of its delegates were women,
indicating the party's indorsement of woman's suffrage. There was
much enthusiasm, and a touch of crusading zeal showed forth when
the ten thousand delegates and their friends sang "The Battle Hymn
of the Republic" and "Onward, Christian Soldiers." Roosevelt
announced the principles of the party in a speech which won the ad-
miration of friends and foes. He demanded that government be de-
pendent on the will of the people, that machine politics be destroyed,
that women be allowed to vote, that labor be given better wages and
shorter hours of work, and that social justice be secured in all the re-
lations of government. August 7 the ticket was selected, Roosevelt
for president and Hiram W. Johnson, governor of California, for vice-
president. The organization was called the "progressive party," and
active efforts were made, before and after the convention, to perfect
its state and local organizations.
Rarely has a campaign been fought so bitterly with such a slight
difference of men and principles. In comparison with old-time leaders
Taft, Wilson, and Roosevelt were all liberals, although
they differed in degrees of liberalism. On the tariff re-
publicans and progressives stood practically together,
demanding lower rates on a protective basis with a view of maintain-
ing the higher wages of American workmen. The democrats re-
848 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
pudiated protection and declared for a tariff for revenue only. Re-
publicans and progressives would regulate the trusts, although the
former wished to make the officials of the trusts criminally liable,
while the latter asked that patents be robbed of their worst monopolis-
tic features. The democrats opposed trusts generally, desired to
regulate more effectively interstate public utilities, and to strengthen
federal control of interstate commerce without weakening state con-
trol. The republicans ignored the initiative and referendum and
declared against judicial recall, although they asked for an easier
method than impeachment of removing bad judges. The progressives
indorsed each of these three measures, and demanded a referendum for
judicial decisions annulling state laws. All the parties supported
conservation of natural resources, a parcels post, currency reform, and
laws to prevent abuses in campaign contributions. The democrats and
progressives indorsed the popular election of United States senators,
a federal income tax, and the nomination of candidates in primaries.
The progressives demanded woman's suffrage, an easier method of
amending the constitution, registration of lobbyists, exclusion of
federal officials from political activity, a department of labor, pro-
motion of labor unions, and protection of the people from deceptive
investment schemes.
The campaign abounded in bitter attacks on Roosevelt by demo-
crats and republicans. La Follette, who felt keenly his own repudia-
tion, declared he was the victim of treachery. He is
paign"* supposed to have given aid to the democrats. Wilson
himself denounced the progressive candidate as a tool of
the steel trust and as a self-seeker. Roosevelt replied with emphasis,
and made many speeches in the North, West, and South. In Mil-
waukee, October 14, he was shot by an insane man who imagined that
Roosevelt was responsible for the murder of McKinley. A serious
flesh wound was the result, but an excellent constitution well pre-
served by temperate habits enabled him to recover rapidly. Taf t con-
ducted a quiet campaign and made few speeches. There was little
hope of his election, and many republicans probably voted for Wilson
to make sure of Roosevelt's defeat.
The election occurred November 5, and of the 531 electoral votes
Wilson received 435, Roosevelt 88, and Taft 8. For the last-named
but two states voted, Utah and Vermont. Five declared
Election ^or R°osevelt — Pennsylvania, Michigan, Minnesota, South
Dakota, and Washington. In California the contest was
close and n progressive and 2 democratic electors were chosen. The
popular vote was 6,290,818 for Wilson, 4,123,206 for Roosevelt,
3,484,529 for Taft, 898,296 for Debs (socialist), 207,965 for Chafin
(prohibitionist), and 29,071 for Reimer (socialist-labor). The demo-
crats carried the house of representatives by a majority of 147 over
republicans and progressive republicans.
CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES 849
LEGISLATIVE PROGRESS UNDER TAFT
The struggle for party supremacy under Taft ought not to divert our
attention from the many reform measures which he helped to carry
through congress. Never has the attention of the people been more
vigorously directed to matters connected with the development of good
government on a democratic basis. The most important resulting
phases are connected with conservation, currency reform, and political
investigations.
For a century the national government gave or sold its abundant
natural resources on generous terms. This policy led to rapid develop-
ment of the Western regions, but it afforded opportunities
for overweening fortunes. Although timber and mineral Conserva-
claims were legally limited in size, speculators obtained tlon:
large tracts collusively, and by the close of the century
the country began to realize that a mistake had been
made. The growing price of lumber, the waste of water power, and
the danger that threatened through deforesting the watersheds caused
alarm in the country. Roosevelt, generally willing to extend the
federal power where the existing system of state relations seemed un-
able to deal with the situation, had his interest aroused and appointed
a commission on conservation to report on the danger. It was evident
to him that the national government should take natural resources
under a more active control and see that they were used for the benefit
of all the people. This policy did not please the people of the West,
who naturally wished to see their waste places settled as rapidly as
possible. Among them were influential interests who saw in the
president^ ideas a check on their plans for amassing wealth. By
July i, 1909, the president had issued orders withholding from settle-
ment 194,000,000 acres, a great deal of it in the western mountains.
In 1912 congress appropriated $1,000,000, and $2,000,000 a year there-
after, to purchase lands for forest reserves in the Appalachian and White
mountains.
Conservation also dealt with irrigation. Before 1900 private enter-
prises secured and developed the most obvious irrigation sites, leasing
or selling water rights to the farmers concerned. Disputes ^. ^
frequently occurred between the water companies and
their patrons, and it was evident that here was another outcropping of
the problem of monopolies. Also the protection of rivers and lakes
yielding irrigation waters was an important question. Finally, great
irrigation plans were made which only the government can carry out.
Out of this complex situation came the national irrigation policy. The
control of the companies has not yet been settled, but the government
has reserved from settlement many areas which supply water, and in
1902 congress advanced $20,000,000 for this purpose, to be satisfied
out of the proceeds of the sales of improved lands.
31
850 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
Our chief known deposits of gold, silver, and copper have long since
passed into private control, but the coal lands in the Far West have
been recently reserved. The most notable instance of this
Lands1 nature refers to the Alaskan deposits, which are very
valuable. In 1909 it became known that 33 adjacent
claims for such lands of 160 acres each, made out in the names of
distinct individuals, were likely to pass into the hands of a group of
Colorado capitalists known as the Cunningham group. The claim-
ants had paid the price fixed by law, $10 an acre, but it was said that
the lands were worth $4,000,000. Secretary Ballinger was supposed
to favor the claimants, and Pinchot's protest against them was one of
the causes of the controversy with which the names of the two men
were associated. As a result of the exposure the claims were event-
ually disallowed. One thousand other claims were pending, and after
investigation by Secretary Fisher, Ballinger's successor, 750 of them
were disallowed. The rest seem to have been filed in good faith, but
they were held up, pending the adoption by congress of a fixed plan for
the control of natural monopolies. The secretary favored govern-
ment ownership with leases to corporations, and his plan had the sup-
port of ex-President Roosevelt, but at the close of 1912 no decision
had been reached. This delay was received with dissatisfaction by the
people of Alaska.
Recent years have made increasingly apparent the need of a more
elastic currency. The Aldrich-Vreeland act, 1908, undertook to supply
the need by allowing banks to issue additional notes on
Reform7 depositing approved state, county, or municipal bonds and
by forming associations with joint responsibility to issue
notes secured by commercial paper. The plan was not received favor-
ably by the banks, although in 1910 a number of the proposed associa-
tions were formed under pressure of the secretary of the treasury.
In the Aldrich-Vreeland act was a provision for a monetary commis-
sion, Senator Aldrich becoming chairman. It was to investigate actual
conditions and to suggest a sound plan of reform. The first result
was a series of reports on banking abroad and at home. An abundance
of individual discussion seemed to show that the financial interests were
opposed to a great central bank, although it was equally clear that
there should be central control of note issues and reserves.
In January, 1911, Senator Aldrich, chairman of the monetary com-
mission, reported the scheme known as the Aldrich currency plan. It
AI proposed the federal incorporation of a "Reserve Associa-
drichPlan tion" with a capital of $300,000,000 to be subscribed for
by the national banks organized in fifteen districts, each
district to be subdivided into local associations. The Reserve Associa-
tion was to discount commercial paper for banks and to receive and
disburse the national funds. It was not to lend money to individuals.
When it was established the issue of money by national banks was to
CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS 851
cease and the Reserve Association was to issue its own notes instead,
subject to national taxation. The plan met a great deal of criticism,
and in October, 1911, it was modified in some important particulars.
The scheme found favor with the banks of the country, but was not
received favorably by the people. It was evident that it was a pri-
vately owned central bank under a less unpopular name, and it was
pointed out that by uniting all the banks and trust companies of the
country in one organization it would deliver the banking function into
the hands of a vast and powerful combination. If the public should at
some future time wish to break the hold of this combination, the task
would require an upheaval in the business world far more serious than
that which accompanied the destruction of the second Bank of the
United States.
The restless and suspicious attitude of the public toward corpora-
tions and their political influence resulted in several congressional
investigations. Among them were authorized in 1910
investigations of the issue of railroad stocks and bonds,
and employers' liability and workmen's compensation, and yestigations.
in 1912 an investigation of the so-called "money trust"
and " shipping trust," and the increased cost of anthracite coal. These
investigations caused much distress to business, especially the inves-
tigation aimed at the concentration of banking capital. In 1910 New
Mexico and Arizona were given permission to frame constitutions and
apply for statehood. A year later they presented themselves at the
door of congress, but the latter had adopted the recall of judges and
was refused admission. By a filibuster New Mexico's case was made
to fall with that of Arizona. It was not until 1912 that both were ad-
mitted, the objectionable clause in the Arizona constitution being
omitted.
Of other important acts passed in Taft's administration the follow-
ing may be mentioned : a law to create a commerce court (1910) ; a
law to establish postal saving banks (1910) ; a "white OtherActs
slave" act (1910); an act to require publicity for cam-
paign contributions in federal elections (1910, amended and extended
in 1911, and the amount of contributions limited) ; a canal act, pro-
viding for administration of the canal and the canal zone and remitting
the tolls to American vessels engaged in coastwise trade (1912); a
pension law adding $25,000,000 annually to the appropriations (1912) ;
a law to create a children's bureau in the department of commerce and
labor (1912) ; an act to establish civil government in the territory of
Alaska (1912) ; and a law creating a department of labor (1913). In
1912 a constitutional amendment for the popular election of senators
was submitted to the states and ratified by them early in 1913. Such
a reform had long been demanded by the states, but it was defeated
by the senate itself. The passage of the amendment was due to the
hard fight which under Roosevelt and Taft was directed against the
obstructive power of the upper house of congress.
852 ADMINISTRATIONS OF ROOSEVELT AND TAFT
The defeat of the republicans in 1912 and the return of the demo-
crats to power seems to be a turning point in American party history.
Out of eleven years of struggle with its inevitable uncertainty has come
an advance in popular government and a checking of the influence of
wealth and political machines. Whether or not popular control is
safer and wiser than the old conservatism is a question over which
the citizens of to-day are still divided. It is a question as old as our
government, and its latter-day reappearance in a form adjusted to
present conditions makes the existing political situation as interesting
and important as the Jeffersonian crisis of 1800.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE
The best original source of national history for this period is The Congressional
Record. The acts of congress are to be found in The United States Statutes at Large,
and the messages of the presidents are in the Record for the day they are com-
municated, and generally in both the Senate and House Documents. In these two
series are found most of the reports of the investigation committees. The annual
message of the President and the reports of the heads of department are in Abridg-
ment, Messages and Documents.
Valuable contemporary works are: The American Year Book (1910-); The
International Year Book (1907-); The Annual Register (1902-). The periodicals
of the period are very useful, especially The Outlook, The American Review of Re-
views, The Independent, The World's Work, and Public Opinion.
Of biographies see: Croley, Marcus Alonzo Hanna (1912); Hovey, Life Story
of J. Pierpont Morgan (1911) ; Cullom, Fifty Years of Public Service (1912) ; Coo-
lidge, Orville H. Platt (1910) ; Autobiography of Thomas C. Plait (1910-); Riis,
Theodore Roosevelt (1904, 1912) ; Leupp, The Man Roosevelt (1904) ; Hale, Woodrow
Wilson, the Story of his Life (191 2) ; Hitchcock, E. A., Fifty Years in Camp and Field
(1910), a diary of a prominent democrat; Autobiography of Robert M. La Follette
(1913) ; and Great Leaders and National Issues of ipi2.
Of general works the following are useful : Stanwood, A History of the Presidency,
1897-1909 (1912) ; Walker, History of the Sherman Law (1910) ; Noyes, Forty Years
of American Finance, 1865-1907 (1909) ; Oberholtzer, The Referendum in America
(1912, revised ed.) ; Haines, The Senate from 1907 to 1912 (1912); Jordan, Five
National Platforms Dissected, Classified, Indexed (1912); White, The Old Order
Changeth (1912); Sedgwick, The Democratic Mistake (1912) ; Beard, Documents on
the Initiative, Referendum, and Recall (1912) ; Butler, Why Should We Change our
Form of Government? (1912) ; and McCarthy, The Wisconsin Idea (1912).
For Independent Reading
Hovey, The Life Story of J. Pierpont Morgan (1911) ; Leupp, The Man Roosevelt
(1904) ; Coolidge, Orville H. Platt (1910) ; White, The Old Order Changeth (1912) ;
Butler, Why Should We Change our Form of Government? (1912) ; McCarthy, The
Wisconsin Idea (1912) ; and Autobiography of Robert M. La Follette (1913).
INDEX
Abercrombie, expedition against Canada,
126.
Abolition. See antislavery.
Academies, for educational use, 478.
Acadia, settled, 112.
Acadians, removal of, 124.
Adams, the, 328.
Adams, Charles Francis, nominated for vice-
president, 452 ; minister to England, 522 ;
and the Geneva arbitration, 673.
Adams, John, and the declaration of inde-
pendence, 187; peace commissioner, 214;
first minister to England, 226; opposed
to Cincinnati, 229; vice-president, 256;
reflected vice-president, 271 ; Hamilton's
opposition to, 273 ; elected president, 273 ;
presidency of, 276-290; relation to his
party, 276 ; desires to conciliate repub-
licans, 276 ; and French quarrel, 278,
282 ; political views, 283 ; and Dr. Cooper,
284 ; reorganizes cabinet, 287 ; opposed by
Hamilton, 273, 276, 282, 287, 288, 289;
defeated, 288-290.
Adams, John Quincy, commissioner at
Ghent, 334 ; opposed to Hartford Conven-
tion, 336 ; secretary of state, 367 ; share in
the Monroe Doctrine, 375 ; candidate for
presidency, 376, 377, 378, 379; elected,
379-380; bargain charged, 379, 389;
parties forming under, 382-384 ; message,
382 ; war on, 383 ; Panama congress, 383 ;
and the patronage, 389 ; his support in
1828, 390; supports Jackson in nullifica-
tion, 409 ; on West India trade, 416 ;
opposes annexation of Texas, 422 ; and
antislavery petition, 431.
Adams, Samuel, colonial leader, 1 70 ; and
"Boston Massacre," 172 ; defends soldiers,
172 ; and committees of correspondence,
174; opposed to Cincinnati, 229; on rati-
fication, 248.
Africa, western coast explored, 25.
Agriculture, in early Virginia, 50; in the
early Carolinas, 83 ; in colonial period,
140; state of, 1800-1815, 345; progress
after civil war, 665.
Aguinaldo, leads revolts against Spain, 809 ;
Dewey aids, 809 ; captured, 810.
Aix-la-Chapelle, treaty of, 1 20.
Alabama, territory created, 345 ; population,
1820, 345 ; a state, 373 ; ratification of her
constitution, 624 ; readmitted, 624 ; repub-
licans overthrown, 632.
Alabama, the confederate ship, 523.
Alabama Claims, the, under A. Johnson,
670 ; Sumner's statement of, 671 ; arbitra-
tion of, 672-674.
Alabama-Mobile river system, 3.
Alaska, purchase of, 643 ; boundary con-
troversy, 825 ; and Cunningham syndicate,
838; civil government in, 851.
Albany, Congress at, 1690, 116; 1754,
122.
Albemarle, settlements in, 82.
Aldrich, N. W., and tariff of 1883, 715 ; and
Payne- Aldrich bill, 837 ; report on cur-
rency, 850.
Algiers, at war, 295, 296.
Algonkins, the, 18; and the French, 113.
Alien Laws, passed, 283 ; Jefferson's way of
meeting, 285.
Allen, Ethan, exploits of, 182.
Altgeld, Governor, pardons convicted anar-
chists, 743 ; and Pullman strike, 743.
Alverstone, Lord, 825.
Amadas, Philip, discovers Roanoke Island,
42.
Amador, Dr., 819.
Ambrister, Captain, executed by Jackson,
369.
Amelia Island, occupied, 331.
Amendments, suggested by the ratifying
states, 248 ; method of making, 253 ; ten
amendments, 258; eleventh and twelfth,
360; suggested by Hartford convention,
337 ; thirteenth, 580, 599 ; fourteenth,
607-609 ; rejected by South, 608, 619 ;
accepted under congressional reconstruc-
tion, 610 ; war, interpreted, 635-638 ; for
income tax, 838; for popular election of
senators, 851.
America, named, 33.
American Colonization Society, 428.
American Tobacco Company, dissolution
suit, 840, 842.
Ames, Oakes, 650.
853
854
INDEX
Amherst, Jeffrey, at capture of Louisburg,
125 ; at capture of Montreal, 128.
Amnesty, proclamation of 1863, 596;
Johnson's, 600 ; act of 1872, 634 ; act for
general, 634.
Anarchists, Chicago, 742.
Anderson, Major, in Fort Sumter, 512, 515;
surrenders, 516. ,
Andover Seminary, founded, 355.
Andre, John, concerned with Arnold, 202.
Andrew, Rev. J. O., and slavery issue, 471.
Andros, Edmund, governor of New England,
94 ; strong measures, 95 ; overthrown, 96 ;
and slavery controversy, 902.
Anglican church, in New England, 148 ; in
Virginia, 151 ; in Maryland and the Caro-
linas, 151; in other colonies, 152; the
Bishop of London, 152 ; proposed American
bishop, 164; as an establishment, 352;
reorganized, 354.
Annapolis Convention, 241.
Antietam, battle of, 555.
Antifederalists oppose ratification, 247-249 ;
on the first amendments, 258; disappear-
ance of, 269.
Antimasonic party, organized, 403 ; opposed
Clinton, 403.
Antislavery, early period of movement, 428-
431-
Apaches, 685.
Appalachian Mountains, influence of, i, 2.
Appointments to office, 292, 393.
Arapahoes at war, 684, 686.
Arbitration treaties, rejected by Senate, 833.
Arbuthnot, hanged by Jackson, 369.
Archbald, Judge, 843.
Area of United States, i.
Argus, the, 328.
Aristocracy, suspected, 218, 228, 229, 230.
Arizona, mining in, 678; a territory, 679,
680; a state, 680, 851.
Arkansas, a state, 463 ; war in, 541 ; recon-
structed under Lincoln, 597 ; readmitted,
624; republicans overthrown, 632.
"Armed Neutrality," league of, 206.
Armstrong, John, Secretary of War, 326, 330.
Army, a British, in the colonies, 164; pay
in arrears, 223; plot of officers, 224;
seize Philadelphia, 224; half-pay to offi-
cers, 229; Cincinnati, 229; in whisky
insurrection, 268, 269; to serve against
France, 279, 281 ; condition of in 1812,
320, 326 ; value of militia, 330 ; after war of
1812, 363; in civil war, 517, 572-574;
organization in 1898, 795 ; and the cap-
tured Spaniards, 802 ; disease at Santiago,
803 ; wounded recover, 803.
Army, confederate, raising, 572, 590; boun-
ties, 573, 590 ; negro troops, 573 ; numbers,
590.
Army, union, organizing, 572; "bounty
jumping," 573; negro troops in, 573;
numbers, 590.
Arnold, Benedict, in Canada, 184, 194;
against St. Leger, 196 ; bis treason, 201 ;
in Virginia, 211 ; in Connecticut, 212.
"Aroostook War," the, 437.
Arthur, Chester A., nominated for vice-
presidency, 702 ; removed from collector-
ship, 702, 708 ; becomes president, 705 ;
and civil service reform, 709 ; and nomina-
tion in 1884, 716.
Articles of Confederation, committee to
prepare, 187; adopted, 1781, 217, 238;
analysis of, 238-240; weakness of, 222;
attempts to amend, 225, 240.
Asbury, Francis, 353.
Ashburton, Lord, in Washington, 438.
Assembly, the colonial development of, 100 ;
in New York, 103.
"Assiento," 120.
"Association," the, 179.
Asylum, the Right of, in Chile, 770.
Atchison, and the Kansas-Nebraska act, 486.
Atlanta, captured, 537.
Bacon, Nathaniel, opposes Governor Berke-
ley, 90; his death, 91.
Bacon's Rebellion, 90.
Bad Axe, battle of, 466.
Baker, Colonel, at Ball's Bluff, 545.
Balboa, discovers the Pacific, 37.
Baldwin, decisive vote in Constitutional
Convention, 245.
Ballinger-Pinchot controversy, 838.
Ballot Reform, 711-712.
Ball's Bluff, battle of, 545.
Balmeceda, 768, 769.
Baltimore, attacked by British, 330.
Baltimore, the, sailors of, attacked, 771 ; at
Manila, 791.
Baltimore, Lord. See Calvert.
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, early history,
464 ; development of, 733, 734.
Bank of North America, 228.
Bank of the United States, first, created, 260.
and the currency, 348; McCulloch v.
Maryland, 359 ; second, chartered, 363 ;
service of, 364; Jackson's "war" on,
411-415; charter vetoed, 412; deposits
removed, 413 ; protest charges, 418 ; lin-
gering hope of recharter, 432 ; attempted
recharter under Tyler, 435.
Banks, combinations of, 740.
INDEX
855
Banks, Deposit, 423.
Banks, General, attacked by Jackson, 547;
at Cedar Mountain, 551.
Banks, National, created, 575.
Baptists, in the Colonies, 148, 151; early
history, 353; Primitive and Missionary,
353; divided by slavery, 456, 472.
Barbary States. See Tripoli.
Barlowe, Arthur, discovers Roanoke Island,
42.
Barnburners, 451; at convention of 1848,
452; secede, 452.
Barre, Col. Isaac, 166.
Barren, Captain, 314.
Baton Rouge, acquired, 331.
Baum, defeated at Bennington, 195.
Bayard, J. A., commissioner at Ghent,
334-
Bayard, T. F., secretary of state, 719; and
Samoa, 765.
Bayonne Decree, 316.
Beaumarchais, 198.
Beauregard, General, at Bull Run, 519;
against Butler, 564.
Behaim, Martin, 26.
Belknap, Secretary, and Indian frauds, 652.
Bell, John, nominated by whigs, 508; vote
of, 500-
Belligerency, recognition of, 522.
Bellomont, Governor, and salary contro-
versy, 10 1.
Bennington, battle of, 195.
Benton, Thomas H., and censure resolutions,
415; specie currency favored, 423.
Berkeley, Admiral, 314.
Berkeley, Sir William, governor of Virginia,
51; his policy in Virginia, 89; opposed by
Bacon, 00; return to England, 91; and the
Anglican Church, 151.
Berlin Decree, 308.
Bernard, Governor, of Massachusetts, 171.
Biddle, Nicholas, asks for new charter, 411;
Jackson and, 411; carries charter in con-
gress, 412; continues to hope, 413; and the
panic, 414.
Bienville, 115.
Bifurcated Invasion of the South, 526.
Big Black river, battle of, 531.
Big Horn, Little, battle of, 688.
Bigot, hampers Montcalm, 127; punished,
127.
"Bird Woman," guides Lewis and Clark,
356.
Birney, J. G., in Ohio, 429; candidate for
presidency, 1844, 443.
Black Code, revised, 430; ante bellum, 602;
post bellum, 602 ; effects of, 602.
"Black Friday," 647.
Black Hawk, war of, 466.
Black Hills, gold found in, 679; Indians
driven out, 687.
Bladensburg, battle of, 329.
Elaine, J. G., raises Southern issue, 653 ;
secretary of state, 703, 723; nominated
1884, 716; the "Mulligan Letters," 717;
and reciprocity, 725; and nomination of
1892, 749; and fur seal controversy, 767;
and Mafia incident, 768; and Isthmian
Canal, 818.
Blair, F. P., in "Kitchen Cabinet," 393;
founds the Globe, 402.
Blair, F. P., Jr., in Missouri, 517; nominated
for vice presidency, 642.
Blair, Rev. James, commissary, 152; founder
of William and Mary College, 154.
Blanco, General, command in Cuba, 787; and
Cervera, 799.
Bland, R. P., champion of Silver, 699; can-
didate for nomination, 1896, 760.
Bland-Allison law, 699.
"Blanket Injunctions," 744.
Block, Adrian, explorations of, 72.
Blockade, established, 517; keeping the,
569; running the, 592.
"Blocks of five," 722.
Blount, J. H., in Hawaii, 773.
Blue, Victor, back of Santiago, 795.
Bceuf, Fort de, 122.
Bonds, in civil war, 574, 576.
Bon Homme Richard, 205.
Bonus Bill, for internal improvements, 365.
Boone, Daniel, 233.
Border States, saved for the union, 517.
Boscawen, failure on the St. Lawrence, 121.
Boston, settled, 64; population, 142; cul-
ture of, 155; troops sent to, 171; "Boston
Massacre," 172; "Tea Party," 176; port
closed, 176; blockaded, 177; siege of,
180-182; evacuated, 182.
Boundaries, 1783, 215.
Boutwell, G. S., secretary of the treasury,
644; financial policy, 662.
Bowdoin, Governor, and Shays's Rebellion,
236.
Boxer Revolt, 823.
Braddock, effect of his defeat, 106; expedi-
tion of, 123.
Bradford, William, elected governor, 61.
Bradley, J. P., his appointment as judge,
664.
Bragg, General, in Kentucky, 529; at Perry-
ville, 529; at Stone's river, 530; at Chicka-
mauga, 533; at Chattanooga, 535; re-
moved from command, 535.
856
INDEX
Brandywine, battle of, 194.
Brant, Joseph, 203.
Bray, Rev. Thomas, 152.
Brazil, coast discovered, 32; skirted by
Cabral, 34.
Breckenridge, J. C., nominated for presi-
dency, 506; his vote, 509.
Brewster, William, at Scrooby, 59; goes to
America, 60.
Brock, General, against Hull, 322.
Broke, Captain, 327.
Brooklyn, battle of, 189.
Brooklyn, the, 800, 801.
Brown, B. Gratz, governor of Missouri, 648;
nominated for vice-presidency, 648.
Brown, General Jacob, 324; at Chippewa,
325; at Lundy's Lane, 325.
Brown, John, retaliates on his opponents,
491; his raid, 502-504; his object, 502;
his death, 503 ; significance of, 503.
Brown, Moses, and Cotton Mills, 349.
Brown University, founded, 154.
Brough, governor of Ohio, 583.
Brougham, Henry, 320.
Bryan, W. J., speech in Chicago convention,
759; nominated, 760; his campaign, 761;
defeated, 762; not crushed, 762; candidate
in 1900, 827; and the convention of 1904,
832; nominated in 1908, 835; influence in
democratic nomination, 845, 846-847.
Bryant, William Cullen, and the Barn-
burners, 451; an independent, 694; civil
service reformer, 707.
Buchanan, James, and nomination of 1852,
485; nominated in 1856, 495; elected,
496; attitude in crisis, 512.
Buckner, General, at Fort Donelson, 527.
Buell, General, cooperates with Grant, 528;
against Bragg, 529; removed from com-
mand, 530.
Buena Vista, battle of, 447.
Buffalo, city of, 341.
Buford, Colonel, at Waxhaw, 207.
Buford's cavalry, at Gettysburg, 560.
Bull, papal, dividing the new world, 29.
"Bull Moose" party 845; organized, 847.
Bull Run, campaign of, 518-520; second
battle of, 550-553 ; Lee's plan of attack,
551; its execution, 551-553.
Bunau-Varilla, 818.
Bunker Hill, battle of , 181.
Burchard, Rev. S. D., incautious utterance,
719-
Burgoyne, General, expedition against New
York, 193-198; and Carleton, 195.
Burke Act, concerning Indians, 690.
Burlingame Treaty, the, 774.
Burnside, General, in East Tennessee, 533;
in command in Virginia, 555; the Fred-
ericksburg campaign, 555-557; in North
Carolina, 570; military arrests, 583.
Burr, Aaron, elected vice-president, 288;
289, 290; plots with Pickering, 300; kills
Hamilton, 301; scheme of, 303-306; trial
of, 305.
Burr, G. L., and Venezuelan boundary, 780.
Bute, Lord, colonial policy of, 161.
Butler, B. F., on the James, 564; "Contra-
bands," 577; charged with cotton sales,
592; prosecutes Johnson, 615; succeeds
Stevens, 633; relations with Grant, 633;
645; and the Sanborn contracts, 651;
Greenback candidate, 698; and civil
service reform, 708.
Butler, Colonel John, 203.
Byrd, Col. William, culture of, 155.
Cabinet, constitutional basis of, 252.
Cabot, George, at Hartford convention,
337-
Cabot, John, explorations of, 35.
Cabot, Sebastian, fame of, 35.
Cabral, voyage to Brazil, 34.
Calaveras skull, the, n.
Calhoun, J. C., elected to congress, 318;
and the second bank, 364; on the tariff,
364 ; on internal improvements, 365 ;
secretary of war, 367 ; 369 ; candidate for
presidency, 377, 378; elected vice-presi-
dent, 377 ; position in Jackson party, 382 ;
opposition of Van Buren, 382 ; supports
nullification, 387 ; reflected vice-president,
390 ; influence in the cabinet, 392 ; af-
fected Eaton affair, 394 ; struck through
internal improvements, 394 ; report on
public improvements, 395 ; and state
rights, 396 ; and Jackson's "union" toast,
399 ; breach with Jackson, 401-402 ; three
papers on nullification, 407 ; becomes
Southern champion, 422 ; secretary of state,
439 ; Texas annexation, 439, 444 ; and Van
Buren's letter, 442 ; on slavery in Oregon,
453 ; compromise speech, 1850, 455 ; death
of, 488.
California, purchase desired by Polk, 446 ;
occupied by American forces, 448; not
made a territory, 452, 453 ; admitted to
Union, 455, 457 ; gold discovered, 480 ;
settlement of, 481 ; government of, 481 ;
and Chinese, 774 ; and Japanese, 776.
Calvert, Cecilius, his policy, 53, 57 ; checks
the Jesuits, 55 ; his proprietary rights,
57-
Calvert, George, Maryland granted to, 52.
INDEX
857
Calvert, Leonard, governor of Maryland,
S3, 54-56.
Cambridge Agreement, 63.
Camden, battle of, 207 ; burned, 211.
Campos, in Cuba, 784, 786.
Canada, ceded to England, 129 ; the cession
criticized, 130, 161, 170; and Quebec Act,
177; invaded by Americans, 183, 194;
capture expected, 321 ; struggle for, 321-
326 ; line of defense, 321 ; reciprocity with,
841, 842. See New France.
Canals, where located, 3 ; the Erie, 4 ; use
of, 464. See Internal improvements.
Canning, George, and the Orders in Council,
308; his irritating attitude, 313; on
Chesapeake-Leopard affair, 315; and the
Monroe Doctrine, 375.
Cannon, Speaker, power reduced, 838.
Capital, the national, located on the Po-
tomac, 260.
Capital, financial, growth after civil war, 665.
Carleton, General, and the Indians, 685.
Carleton, Sir Guy, against Arnold, 184, 194,
195 ; retained in Canada, 195.
Carlisle, J. G., secretary of the treasury,
753 ; maintaining parity, 754 ; bonds for
gold, 754.
Carolina, created, 81, 82 ; early history, 82-
83 ; fundamental constitutions, 82 ; two
divisions, 82 ; misrule of proprietors, 106 ;
sale to crown, 107.
Caroline, Fort, in.
Carpet-baggers, 621.
Carthage, battle of, 541.
Cartier, Jacques, explorations of, 36, 112.
Carver, John, governor of Plymouth, 61.
Cass, Lewis, nominated for presidency,
452 ; defeated, 452 ; in 1852, 485 ; leaves
cabinet, 512.
Catherine of Aragon, and Columbus, 28, 31.
Caucus, nominating, origin, 288 ; destroyed,
378.
Cedar Creek, battle of, 565.
Cedar Mountain, battle of, 551.
Cerro Gordo, battle of, 449.
Cervera, departs from Cape Verde Islands,
700 ; reaches Santiago, 793 ; search for,
793 ; in Santiago, 799 ; destruction of his
fleet, 800-801.
Chamberlain, D. H., in South Carolina
politics, 655, 657, 694.
Chambersburg, burned by Early, 565.
Champion Hill, battle of, 531.
Champlain, founds Quebec, 112 ; attacks the
Iroquois, 112.
Champlain, Lake, battle of, 325.
Chancellorsville, battle of, 557-559.
Channing, Rev. William E., founds Amer-
ican Unitariani sm, 355.
Chantilly, battle of, 553.
Chapultepec, taken, 450.
"Charlefort," in.
Charles I, and the colonies, 77.
Charles II, and the colonies, 80.
Charleston, settled, 83; and tea duty, 175;
attacked by the British, 183 ; taken by
the British, 207 ; British driven into, 211 ;
evacuated, 214; democratic convention
at, 505 ; evacuated by Hardee, 540 ;
naval operations against, 570.
Chase, Samuel, at trial of Dr. Cooper, 284;
impeachment of, 294.
Chase, S. P., and opponents of Lincoln,
582, 584 ; presides over impeachment,
615-617 ; and democratic nomination,
642 ; and legal tender cases, 664.
Chattahoochee, Sherman crosses, 537.
Chattanooga, campaign for, 532-535 ; battle
of, 535-
Cherokees, 18; relations with the English,
121 ; war against the Americans, 130;
at war, 1776, 203; and Spain, 265; pun-
ished by Tennesseeans, 265 ; removal of,
400, 466 ; in the West, 466.
Cherry Valley, raided, 203.
Chesapeake, the, defeated by the Shannon,
327-
Chesapeake Bay, campaign in, 329-330.
Chesapeake-Leopard incident, 314; settled
by the President, 318.
Cheves, Langdon, elected to Congress, 318.
Chew house, the, 194.
Cheyennes, war with southern, 684, 686,
war with northern, 685, 687, 688.
Chicago, desires transcontinental railroad,
68 1 ; a railroad center, 733, 734 ; strike of
1886, 742.
Chickamauga, battle of, 533; Park, 795.
Chickasaws, removal of, 400, 466.
Chile, revolution against Balmeceda, 768;
Eagan's sympathy, 769 ; the Itata, 769 ;
right of asylum, 770 ; the Baltimore, sailors
of, attacked, 770.
China, American relations with, 822 ; Boxer
revolt, 823 ; legations surrounded, 823 ;
army of relief, 823.
Chinese Immigration, 774.
Chippewa, battle of, 325.
Chivington's Massacre, 684.
Choctaws, removal of, 400, 466.
Choiseul, criticism of England's policy, 130.
Churubusco, 449.
Cibola, 39.
Cienfuegos, Schley at, 793, 794.
858
INDEX
Cincinnati, society of, 229; city founded,
342.
Citizenship, National, denned by the courts,
635-638.
Civil Rights Bill, of 1866, 606 ; of 1875, 634 ;
interpreted by courts, 637.
Civil Service Reform, Grant and, 646;
origin of reform, 707 ; Sumner and, 707 ;
Jenckes and, 707 ; first commission, 708 ;
Pendleton act, 709 ; execution of, 709-
711 ; under Cleveland, 709, 720.
Claiborne, William, claims Kent Island, 55,
Clark, Champ, candidate for nomination,
845.
Clark, George Rogers, 203.
Clark, William, explorations of, 356.
Clay, Henry, elected to Congress, 318;
commissioner at Ghent, 334; on tariff,
364 ; on internal improvements, 365 ;
heads opposition, 367 ; on South America,
367; attacks Jackson, 370; on the Mis-
souri compromise, 374 ; candidate for presi-
dency, 1824, 377, 378, 379 ; makes Adams
president, 379 J bargain charged, 382 ;
united with Adams, 382 ; and Panama
congress, 383 ; and the tariff, 385 ;
nominated, 1832, 404 ; defeated, 405 ;
his compromise tariff, 410; for the bank,
412, 414, 415; censure of Jackson, 414;
on surplus, 424; loses nomination, 434;
opposed to Tyler, 435 ; on Texan annexa-
tion, 442 ; and compromise of 1850, 454-
457 ; death of, 488.
Clayton-Bulwer Treaty, made, 458; and
a canal, 815 ; annulled, 817.
Cleveland, Grover, and the civil service, 709,
711, 720; governor of New York, 716;
nominated for presidency, 716; elected,
719; as president, 719; cabinet, 719;
and opponents, 720; and tariff reform,
721 ; renominated, 722 ; on pensions, 726 ;
reelected, 728; on Wilson-Gorman bill,
729; on silver, 1892, 750; opposition of
West and South, 751 ; nominated, 1892,
751; elected, 752; second cabinet, 753;
and the Sherman silver law, 755 ; pro-
tecting the reserve, 755-757 ; repudiated
by his party, 758 ; Hawaiian policy, 773 ;
and Venezuelan dispute, 778-781 ; and
Cuba, 785, 786.
"Cliff Dwellers," the, 12.
Climate, variations of, i .
Clinton, De Witt, and election of 1812, 319;
and Erie canal, 366.
Clinton, General, demonstration against
Albany, 197 ; relieves Howe, 200 ; in the
South, 207 ; aids Corawallis, 212.
Clinton, George, on ratification, 249; a
republican, 270; and vice-presidency, 271 ;
in the election of 1800, 288; Jefferson
favors, 300, 301 ; elected vice-president,
302; death of, 319.
Coal, deposits of, 8-10 ; anthracite, 9 ; dis-
tribution, 9.
Coal lands, conservation of, 850.
Coal strike, anthracite, 830.
Cobb, Howell, 499.
Cochrane, Admiral, 330.
Cod fisheries, 5.
Colbert and New France, 115.
Cold Harbor, battle of, 563.
Coif ax, Schuyler, vice-president, 642 ; and
the Credit Mobilier, 650.
Coligny, plants colony in Florida, in.
Colleges, progress of, 478-479 ; relation to
churches, 478, 479.
Colombia, and an isthmian canal, 814;
treaty with, 814 ; Hay-Herran convention,
818 ; and Panama revolution, 819.
Colon, the, 800, 801.
Colonial government, struggle for assembly
in New York, 103 ; colonial treasurer,
104; the New England town, 134, 156;
the Southern County, 135, 155; local,
155—158; mixed form of, 156.
Colonial policy, 813-814.
Colonial system, characteristics of, 99-101.
Colonies, British supervision, depends on
king, 76 ; Laud's commission, 77 ; War-
wick's commission, 77 ; Lords of trade,
77 ; effects of Puritan Revolution, 77 ;
Navigation Laws, 78.
Colorado, explorations of, 39.
Colorado, settled, 677 ; state and territory,
678, 680.
Columbia, S. C., burned, 540.
Columbia University, founded, 154.
Columbus, Christopher, early life, 27 ; and
Toscanelli, 27 ; seeking aid, 28 ; sets sail,
28; land discovered, 29; discoveries, 29,
30, 31 ; honored in Spain, 29, 31 ; death of,
31-
Comanches, 685.
Combinations, industrial, 731-744; prin-
ciples of, 731 ; early, 731 ; advantages
claimed for, 732 ; in railroads, 732-735 ',
in manufactures, 736—740 ; in banking,
740-741 ; in labor, 740-744.
Commerce. See trade.
Commerce Court, 839, 843.
Committees of Congress, 258.
Committees of correspondence appointed,
174.
"Common Sense," Paine's, 186.
INDEX
859
Compact theory, in 1798, 285.
Competition, conditions of, 731.
Compromise of 1850, desire for harmony,
454 ; Clay's proposals, 455 ; debated, 455-
457 ; adopted, 457 ; finality of, 485.
Concord, battle of, 180.
Confederacy, the, arming for war, 517;
problems, 586 ; constitution, 587 ; its
president, 587 ; peace movement in, 588 ;
foreign affairs, 588 ; and France, 589 ;
navy of, 589 ; finances of, 590 ; manufac-
tures in, 591 ; railroads in, 591 ; cotton,
S9i.
"Confederate States of America," organized,
5".
Confiscation acts, first, 576; second, 576,
578.
Congregationalists, 354.
Congress, flees from Philadelphia, 225 ;
composition of, 250.
Congress, the, 328.
Congress, authority of, 359; approves
Lincoln, 519; supports war, 519. See
Continental Congress.
Conkling, Roscoe, and renomination of
Grant, 652, 702 ; quarrel with Elaine,
694, 703 ; and Garfield, 703 ; resigns
senatorship, 704 ; on civil service reform,
708.
Connecticut, river towns founded, 69;
Lord Saye and Sele, 69 ; Saybrook settled,
69 ; New Haven settled, 69 ; New Haven
and Connecticut merged, 69; government
of New Haven, 69 ; Pequot War, 70 ;
and New England Confederation, 71 ;
New charter, 80; and the Dominion of
New England, 94; resists stamp act, 168;
ratifies the constitution, 247 ; population,
341 ; constitutional revision in, 473.
Conservation, 849.
Consolidation, national, checked by courts,
($36.
Constellation, the, 279, 328; defeats I'lnsur-
gente, 281.
Constitution, federal, prepared, 242-247;
adopted, 247-250; analysis of, 250-254;
interpretation of, 285-287 ; interpreted by
Marshall, 357; and dependencies, 813.
Constitution, the, constructed, 279; takes
the Guerrilre, 327; takes the Java, 327.
Constitutions, state, reform of, 472-476.
Continental Congress, called, 178; two sides
in, 178; significance of, 179; second con-
gress, 181 ; authority of, 217 ; inefficiency,
217 ; end of, 256.
"Contrabands," 577.
Contreras, taken by Scott, 449.
Contiibutions, political, from corporations,
834; law on, 839, 851.
Convention, constitutional, advantage of,
241 ; suggested, 241 ; elected, 242 ; meets,
242 ; proceedings, 242-247.
Convention, nominating, origin of, 404.
Cooley, T. M., on execution of the interstate
commerce act, 735.
Cooper, Peter, nominated by Greenback
party, 697.
Cooper, Dr. Thomas, trial of, 284.
Copperheads, 582.
Corinth, Johnston at, 528 ; taken by Halleck,
529-
Corn, Indian, significance of, 8 ; a staple, 8.
Cornbury, Lord, governor of New York, 103.
Cornwallis, Lord, in New Jersey, 191 ; in
command in the South, 207 ; at Camden,
207 ; at Charlotte, 208 ; pursues Greene,
209 ; in North Carolina, 209 ; at battle of
Guilford Courthouse, 210; in Wilmington,
210; enters Virginia, 211; surrenders, 313.
Corporation tax, 838.
Corte-Real, Gaspar, 34.
Cortez, Hernando, in Mexico, 37.
Cosa, Juan de la, 38.
Cotton, a staple crop, 8 ; gin invented, 345 ;
and slavery, 346 ; area of, 346 ; production
and price, 346.
Cotton, Rev. John, against Roger Williams,
66 ; against Mrs. Hutchinson, 67 ; against
Quakers, 67.
County, the, planted, 135 ; government,
155 ; in New York, 156.
Courts, federal, the system, 252 ; established,
257 ; jurisdiction defined, 357-360.
Cowpens, battle of, 208.
Cox, J. D., secretary of interior, 644; resig-
nation of, 645.
"Crater, the," at Petersburg, 564.
Crawford, W. H., and the presidency, 1816,
367 ; in the cabinet, 367 ; candidate in
1824, 377, 378, 379, 38o ; support goes to
Jackson, 382.
Crazy Horse, in Sioux War, 687, 688.
Credit Mobilier, the, 649.
Creeks, the, 18; and the English, 121;
relations with the United States, 265;
Creeks subdued by Jackson, 332 ; at treaty
of Fort Jackson, 332 ; relation with Semi-
noles, 368 ; removal of, 400, 407, 466.
"Crime against Kansas, The," Sumner's
speech, 490.
"Crisis, The," Turnbull's, 387.
Crittenden, Senator, efforts to avoid war,
513-
Crittenden Compromise, 512.
86o
INDEX
Cromwell, Oliver, and the colonies, 77, 80.
Crook, General, against the Sioux, 687-689 ;
and Dull Knife's band, 689.
Crops, staple, 8.
Crown Point, taken by the British, 127;
taken by Ethan Allen, 182.
Crozat, has monopoly in Louisiana, 115.
Cuba, discovered, 29; settled, 31; two
parties in, 782 ; ten years' war, 782 ;
reforms promised, 784-785 ; revolt of 1895,
785 ; methods of the Cubans, 785 ; Ameri-
can intervention, 786-790; reforms offered
by Sagasta, 787 ; and Spanish war debt,
805 ; condition since the war, 806-807 ;
Platt amendment, 807; reoccupation,
807.
Culpeper, Pope at, 550.
Culpeper, Lord, governor of Virginia, 92.
Cumberland road bill, vetoed by Monroe,
395-
Currency, early, 348; in the civil war, 575.
See Finance.
Curtis, B. R., opinion in Dred Scott case,
498; defends Johnson, 615.
Curtis, G. W., and civil service reform, 646,
707, 708; as an independent, 693, 718.
Custer, General, and the Indians, 686;
death of, 688.
Cutler, Manasseh, and Ohio Company, 232.
Daiquiri, landing at, 796.
Dakota, early history, 679 ; a territory, 679 ;
a state, 680 ; 748 ; gold in, 679, 687 ; Sioux
at war, 685, 687-689.
Dale, Captain, in Tripolitan war, 295.
Dale, Sir Thomas, in Virginia, 49.
Dallas, George M., vice-president, 441.
Dartmouth College, founded, 154.
Dartmouth College -o. Woodward, 359.
Davenport, Rev. John, 69.
Davie, William R., partisan leader, 207.
Davis, J. C. Bancroft, 673.
Davis, Jefferson, at Buena Vista, 448;
secretary of war, 486; Southern leader,
488 ; resolutions in the senate, 505 ; pres-
ident of the confederacy, 511; friendship
for Bragg, 535 ; leaves Richmond, 567 ;
proposes to continue resistance, 568; as
confederate president, 587; imprisoned,
641 ; death, 641.
Dawes Act, concerning Indians, 690.
Deane, Silas, in Paris, 198.
Dearborn, in Jefferson's Cabinet, 292 ; in
war of 1812, 323.
Debt, Revolutionary. See Finances.
Debts, British, in treaty of 1783, 216;
not paid, 227, 261.
Decatur, 327; burns the Philadelphia, 296;
in the Mediterranean, 296.
Declaratory Act, 168.
Deerfield, attacked, 118.
Delaware, settled by Sweden, 75 ; conquered
by Stuyvesant, 75; acquired by Penn.,
86 ; boundary controversy, 87, 88 ; govern-
ment, 87; relation to Pennsylvania, 104;
ratines constitution, 247.
De Lesseps, Ferdinand, in the United States,
816.
De Lima v. Bidwell, 814.
De Lome, letter published, 787.
Democracy, development of, 1815-1861,
472-476.
Democratic party, in the civil war, 581 ;
in elections of 1862, 582 ; copperheads,
582, 583 ; in the South after the war, 621 ;
condition of, after the war, 640; in 1868,
642; in 1872, 648; in 1876, 652-657;
gain house of representatives, 651 ; investi-
gating election of 1876, 695 ; efforts to
repeal election laws, 696, 697 ; in elections
of 1878, 697 ; its progress before 1884, 719;
split in, 653, 702, 716, 720; Western and
Southern wings, in 1892, 751; convention
of 1896, 758-760; carries house in 1910,
840.
De Monts, plants colony, 112.
Departments of state created, 257 ; of the
navy, created, 281.
Dependencies, government of, 813, 814.
Depew, C. M., 834.
Detroit, held against Pontiac, 131; in the
revolution, 204; position of, 321; Hull at,
322; recovered, 323.
Deux-Ponts, Colonel, 213.
Dewey, George, ordered to Manila, 791 ;
Battle of Manila Bay, 791 ; a rear admiral,
791 ; on Schley-Sampson controversy, 804.
Dexter, and Hartford Convention, 336.
Diaz, Bartholomew, 26.
d'Iberville, settle Louisiana, 115.
Dickinson, John, "Farmer's Letters," 170;
and the articles of confederation, 238.
Diedrich, Admiral von, at Manila, 792.
Dingley Tariff Act, 729.
Diplomacy, a new school of, 762.
Diplomatic History of the United States,
beginning of, 119 ; treaty of Paris, 129.
Discourse on Western Planting, 44.
Discovery of America, by the Norse, 23 ; by
Zeno brothers, 23; bearing of oriental
trade on, 24 ; relation to spread of knowl-
edge, 25, 26.
District of Columbia, located, 260; slave-
trade abolished, 455, 457.
INDEX
861
Donelson, Fort, captured, 527.
Dongan, Governor, and the Iroquois, 114.
Dorchester, speech to Indians, 263.
Dorr, Thomas W., struggle for constitu-
tional reform, 474 ; takes up arms, 475.
Douglas, Stephen A., at nominating conven-
tion of 1852, 485 ; and the Kansas-Ne-
braska Act, 487 ; opposes Lecompton
Constitution, 492, 493 ; in debate with
Lincoln, 499-503 ; destroyed by Lincoln,
501 ; Freeport doctrine, 501 ; opposition of
South to, 505 ; at Charleston convention,
505 ; nominated for presidency, 506 ;
supports the war, 516.
Dow, Neal, 480.
Downes v. Bidwell, 814.
Draft, in use, 572 ; riots, 572.
Drainage systems, 2.
Drake, Sir Francis, 41 ; at Roanoke Island,
42.
Dred Scott Decision, 497-499; its futility,
499; in Charleston convention, 505.
Drift man, 12.
Drummond, William, execution of, 91.
Drury's Bluff, battle of, 564.
Duane, W. J., secretary of the treasury,
413-
Dudley, and vote purchasing, 722.
Dudley, Joseph, governor of Massachusetts,
95, 102 ; sentences Leisler, 103.
"Duke's Laws," the, in New York, 83, 157.
Dull Knife's Band, fate of, 689.
"Dunmore's War," 203.
Duquesne, Fort, taken by Forbes, 125;
called Fort Pitt, 126.
Dutch, stock in middle colonies, 145.
Duxbury, 62.
D wight, Theodore, in Hartford convention,
337-
Dyer, Mrs., execution of, 68.
Eagan, in Chile, 769, 771.
Early, General, in Pennsylvania, 559; at
Gettysburg, 559; his raid toward Wash-
ington, 565 ; at Cedar Creek, 565.
East India Company, and tea, 175.
Eastward Ho, 44.
Eaton, Dorman B., and civil service reform,
708, 709.
Eaton, John H., in Jackson's cabinet, 392 ;
affairs of his wife, 394; resigns from the
cabinet, 402.
Eaton, Mrs., Jackson and, 394) 401.
Eaton, Theophilus, 69.
Eaton, William, 295.
Edmunds, Senator, reform candidate in 1880,
702 ; and in 1884, 716, 718.
Education, in the colonies, 153-155 ; colleges,
153-154; the churches and, 154; the
college curriculum, 155; middle schools,
J55 » colonial culture, 155; progress of,
until 1 86 1, 476-480; public school system,
developed, 476-478; the academy, 478;
colleges, 478-480.
Edwards, Rev. Jonathan, 150, 354.
El Caney, attacked, 797, 798.
Elections, when held and how, 251.
Elections, presidential, 1789, 256; 1792, 271;
1796, 273; 1800, 288-290; 1804, 302;
1808, 311; 1812, 319; 1816, 366; 1820,
368; 1824, 379-38o; 1828, 300; 1832,
403-405; 1836, 425; 1840, 433-435;
1844, 441-443; 1848, 451-452; 1852, 485;
1856,496; 1860,506-509; 1864, 584; 1868,
641-643; 1872, 649; 1876, 652-657; 1880,
702; 1884, 719; 1888, 723; 1892, 752;
1896, 762; 1900, 827; 1904, 832; 1908,
836; 1912, 848.
Electoral Commission of 1877, 656.
Ellsworth, Oliver, in constitutional conven-
tion, 245.
Elkton, 194.
Emancipation, during civil war, 577-581 ;
"contrabands," 577; with compensa-
tion, 578, 580; in confiscation acts, 578;
proclamation of, 579, 580; thirteenth
amendment, 580.
Embargo Act, passed, 310; enforcement of,
310; repealed, 311 ; effects of, 311.
Employees, non-agricultural, 741.
Endicott, John, settles Salem, 63.
Enforcement bill, of 1870, 633; of 1871,
634; of 1874, 634.
England, explorations of, 35 ; refuses com-
mercial treaty, 262 ; at war with France,
266; neutrality proclamation, 266; influ-
ence in American politics, 271, 276;
attitude toward neutral trade, 272, 279;
restricts American trade, 306-309; im-
pressment, 306; relenting, 319; war
plan, 321 ; and New England discontent,
335 ; and the fisheries, 347 ; execution of
Arbuthnot and Ambrister, 369; relations
with, during the civil war, 521-524; favors
the South, 521; grants confederate bel-
ligerency, 522; and the Trent affair, 522;
confederate cruisers, 523 ; and Alabama
claims, 670, 674 ; in Samoa, 765 ; our
Samoan relations with, 765-766; and
fur seal controversy, 767 ; and the Amer-
ican war with Spain, 790; and Hay-
Pauncefote treaty, 817.
English bill, the, 493.
English stock, distributed, 145.
862
INDEX
Enterprise, the, 295, 328.
Eric the Red, 23.
Erie, Fort, 321.
Erie, Lake, battle of, 323, 324.
Erie Railroad, development of, 733.
Erskine, treaty of, 316.
Established Church. See Anglican Church.
Estaing, Count d', at Newport, 200; at
Savannah, 207.
Essex, the, 295, 328; the case of, 307.
Essex county, 336.
"Essex Junto," 288.
Eustis, secretary of war, 326.
Eutaw Springs, battle of, 211.
Evans, R. D., at Santiago, 800, 801, 802.
Evarts, William M., defends Johnson, 615,
6 1 6, secretary of state, 694; refuses to
attend White House dinners, 703.
Everett, Edward, on the patronage, 389.
Ewell, General, in Pennsylvania, 558, 559,
560, 561.
Explorations, on the coast, 31-38.
Explorations of the interior, 37-39.
Ezra Church, battle of, 537.
Fairbanks, C. W., elected vice-president,
832.
Fairfield, Governor, 437.
Fallen Timber, battle of the, 263.
Falmouth burned, 186.
Farragut, Admiral, at New Orleans, 529;
takes Mobile Bay, 571.
Far West, exploration of, 355-357-
Fava, Baron, withdrawn, 768.
"Federalist," the, authorship of, 247.
Federalists, favor ratification, 247-249;
after ratification, 269; strong policy of,
283-285; overthrow of, 287-290; divided,
287; defeated, 288; against war of 1812,
320; and the war of 1812, 335-337.
Ferguson, Major, hi North Carolina, 208;
at King's Mountain, 208.
Filipinos, army in the field, 809; revolt
of, 810 ; revolt subdued, 810 ; native politi-
cal party, 812.
Fillmore, Millard, vice-president, 451, 452;
president, 458.
Finances, revolutionary debt, 222 ; conti-
nental money, 223; attempts to confer
taxing power on congress, 225; first
revenue bill of federal congress, 257;
reorganization under Hamilton, 259-261 ;
refunding the revolutionary debt, 259 ;
assumption of state debts, 259; Bank
established, 260 ; excise tax, 261 ; policy
of Gallatin, 293; and war of 1812, 319,
320, 321, 336, 348; currency, 1783-1815,
348; in the war of 1812, 348; national
debt paid, 422; deposit banks, 423;
specie currency favored, 423; surplus
revenue, 424 ; specie circular, 425 ; sub-
treasury, 433; in civil war, 519, 574-576;
bonds issued, 574, 576; legal tender act,
574; national banks, 575 ; currency issued,
575; confiscation acts, 576; confederate,
590; Pendleton's ideas, 642; at the end
of the civil war, 660; refunding, 66 1 ;
war taxes reduced, 66 1, 663 ; legal tender
reduced, 66 1 ; resumption of specie pay-
ment, 668; inflation demanded in the
West, 697 ; Greenback party, 697 ; free
coinage, 698; Bland-Allison law, 699;
resumption achieved, 699-700; tariff
reform, 712-715; war taxes, 713; the
surplus, 714, 724; McKinley Act, 724-
726, 727; Bland law in operation, 746;
Silver notes, 746; shrinkage of bank
notes, 746; sentiment for silver, 747;
Sherman silver law, 747; Windom sec-
retary of treasury, 747; attack on the
reserve, 753, 755; repeal of Sherman
silver law, 754—755 ; reserve diminished,
755; "endless chain," the, 755~757;
Morgan-Belmont agreement, 756; con-
fidence restored, 757; a corporation tax,
838; currency reform, 850; Aldrich-
Vreeland act, 850 ; Aldrich currency report,
850.
"Fiscal Corporation," 435.
Fish, Hamilton, secretary of state, 644;
and Santo Domingo annexation, 671 ;
the treaty of Washington, 672; the
Alabama arbitration, 673 ; and the Vir-
ginius, 783.
Fisheries, 4-6 ; colonial, 141 ; whaling, 142 ;
and treaty of 1783, 215; condition of,
1783-1815, 347.
Fisher's Hill, battle of, 565.
Fisk, James, scheme to corner gold, 646.
Fletcher, Governor, in New York, 103.
Fletcher v. Peck, 302, 358.
Florida, the French in, in; attacked by
South Carolina, 119; West, claimed by
Jefferson, 300 ; Jefferson's plan to acquire,
302; conquest expected in 1812, 321,
331; plans to seize, 332; negotiation to
purchase, 368-370; acquired, 37°; a
state, 463 ; Seminoles under Osceola, 467 ;
readmitted, 624 ; republicans overthrown,
632; disputed returns in 1876, 655, 657;
surrendered to democrats, 657.
Florida, the confederate ship, 523.
Floyd, General, at Fort Donelson, 527.
Food products, 7.
INDEX
863
Foote's Resolutions, 396.
Foraker Act, 814.
Forbes, General, expedition against Fort
Duquesne, 125.
"Force Bill," 410.
Forest, General, and negro prisoners, 574
Forests, 6.
Forts, Southern, status of, 512 ; negotiations
attempted, 515; Sumter attacked, 516
Forts, Western, not surrendered, 262 ; in the
Jay treaty, 272.
Foster, British minister, 335.
"Fourteen-Diamond-Ring" Case, the, 814
Fowltown, attacked, 369.
Fox, Charles James, 308.
Fox's Blockade, 308.
France, explorations of, 35 ; colony of, in
Florida, 1 1 1 ; as a colonizing nation, 1 1 1
115, 129; immigrants from, 145; treaties
of alliance and commerce, 1778, 198-200
volunteers, 198; sends d'Estaing, 200
army at Yorktown, 212; relations with
1793, 266; neutrality proclamation, 266
Genet in America, 266; interpreting the
treaties, 267; in American politics, 271,
276; attitude toward neutral trade, 271,
279; and Monroe's mission, 277; refuses
to receive Pinckney, 278; seizes American
ships, 279; feeling against, 279; warships
attacked, 281 ; three commissioners sent,
279; X, Y, Z papers, 280; treaty of 1800,
282; settles claims, 417-419; seizing
American ships, 313, 316; in Mexico, 589,
643 ; and confederate arms, 589 ; Seward
and Mexico, 643. See Napoleon.
Franklin, battle of, 538.
Franklin, Benjamin, and Pennsylvania
militia, 105; at Albany congress, 1754,
123; supports acquisition of Canada,
130, 161 ; and Philadelphia culture, 155 ;
on stamp act, 168; and "common sense,"
1 86; and declaration of independence,
187; in Paris, 198; peace commissioner,
214; opposed to Cincinnati, 229; in Con-
stitutional Convention, 242, 245.
Franklin, General, at Fredericksburg, 556.
"Franklin, State of," 234.
Frayser's Farm, battle of, 549.
Frederick the Great, on Washington, 192.
Fredericksburg, battle of, 555-557-
Free coinage. See Silver.
Freedmen, attitude in 1865, 601, 603;
"forty acres and a mule," 603; receive
the franchise, 607, 609-611; as citizens,
620; republicans, 622; on the juries, 637.
Freedmen's Bureau, created, 603 ; bill of
1866, 605.
Freeman's Farm, battles of, 197.
Free Soil Party, organized, 452; in 1852,
485-
Fre'mont, J. C., in California, 449 ; nominated
for presidency, 495 ; in Missouri, 542,
577 ; emancipation order, 578.
French, activity in Ohio valley, 121; in the
English colonies, 145.
French and Indian wars, 115-130; influence
of, 100.
Frenchtown, 323.
Friar lands, 812.
Frolic, the, 327, 328.
Frontenac, services to New France, 115,
116; control of the lakes, 116; and the
Iroquois, 117.
Frontenac, Fort, destroyed, 125, 126.
Frontier, advance in colonial times, 2, 100.
Frontiersmen, American-born, 148.
Fugitive Slave Law, 351; a new, 455, 457;
not enforced, 486.
Fur seal controversy, 767.
Fur trade, 4.
Gage, General, commander-in-chief, 171 ;
in Boston, 178, 180; attempts to seize
supplies, 180; Bunker Hill, 181.
Gaines's Mill, battle of, 548.
Gallatin, Albert, and whisky insurrection,
268 ; secretary of treasury, 292 ; financial
policy, 293 ; compared with Hamilton,
294; and war finance, 319, 320, 321;
commissioner at Ghent, 334.
Gama, Vasco da, reaches India, 34.
Game, destroyed in the West, 683.
Garfield, James A., announces radical pro-
gram, 608; nominated for presidency,
702 ; elected, 702 ; cabinet, 703 ; relation
to civil service reform, 704, 708 ; death of,
705-
Garrison, W. L., work of, 429.
Gas pie, destroyed, 175, note.
Gates, General, against Burgoyne, 197;
command in the South, 207; superseded,
208 ; and army plot, 224.
Guam, acquisition of, 806.
Genesee lands, 341.
Gengt, in the United States, 266 ; on Wash-
ington, 266; and the republicans, 266, 271.
eneva, arbitration tribunal at, 673.
Georgia, established, 109; government of,
no; relations with Spaniards, no; White-
field, Rev. George, no; and stamp act,
1 68; overrun by British, 206; recovered
by Americans, 211; ratifies the constitu-
tion, 248; and Western lands, 263, 264;
and parties, 271 ; and Yazoo claims, 301,
864
INDEX
302; cedes lands, 344; Indians to be
removed, 344 ; immigration to, 344 ; land
grants in Fletcher ». Peck, 358; and the
Cherokees, 400, 407, 466 ; rejects nullifica-
tion, 400 ; Indians removed, 466 ; Governor
Jenkins removed, 623 ; military govern-
ment restored, 625 ; readmitted, 625 ;
republicans overthrown, 631.
Georgia v. Stan ton, case of, 612.
Germain, Lord, 192, 193.
Germans, settled in the colonies, 146.
Germintown, battle of, 194.
Germany, in Samoa, 765, our Samoan rela-
tions with, 765-766; feeling in regard to
war with Spain, 790; her fleet in Manila
Bay, 792 ; and Venezuelan debts, 826.
Gerry, Elbridge, commissioner to France,
, 279, 280; vice-president, 319.
Gettysburg, battle of, 559-562.
Gilbert, Sir Humphrey, and colonization,
42.
Glacial period, influence of, 6.
Gloucester, the, 800, 801.
Glover, Colonel, 190.
Goethals, G. W., at Panama, 822.
Gold, deposits of, 10.
Gold, in Hayti, 30; in California, 480;
mining of, 677-680.
Gold plank, adopted by republicans, 760.
Goldsboro, N. C., Sherman halts at, 541.
Gorges, Sir Ferdinando, 62, 70.
Gorman, A. P., opposed to Cleveland, 721.
Gosnold, Bartholomew, aids colonization,
45 ; a Virginia councillor, 47.
Gould, Jay, scheme to corner gold, 646.
Gourgues, Dominique de, in.
Government, colonial, Virginia, 45, 49;
Maryland, 53 ; Plymouth, 61, 62 ; Massa-
chusetts, 64; New Haven, 69; New Eng-
land confederation, 71 ; in New Nether-
land, 74 ; in Carolinas, 82, 83 ; in New
York, 83; the New York assembly, 84;
influence of revolution of 1688, 100;
voting money, 101-102.
Governor, salary of, 101-102.
Graham, William A., nominated for vice-
presidency, 485.
" Granger Laws," 734.
Grant, Colonel, against the Cherokees, 131.
Grant, U. S., campaign in the Tennessee,
527-529 ; at Forts Henry and Donelson,
527 ; confident position on the Tennessee,
528; at battle of Shiloh, 528; operations
against Vicksburg, 530-532; at Chatta-
nooga, 34 ; lieutenant-general, 535 ; trans-
ferred to Virginia, 535 ; from the Wilder-
ness to Petersburg, 563-564; pursues
Lee, 567 ; at Appomattox, 567 ; secretary
of war, 614; quarrel with Johnson, 614;
attitude toward reconstruction, 633,
645 ; nominated for presidency, 641 ;
elected, 643; his political errors, 644;
cabinet, 644 ; and civil service reform,
646; the Gould-Fish scheme, 646; renom-
inated, 648; reflected, 649; as president,
649; relation with whisky ring, 651; and
Belknap scandal, 652; candidate for
third term in 1876, 652; in 1880, 702;
Santo Domingo treaty, 671 ; trip around
the world, 702; and civil service reform,
707.
Grasse, Count de, in the Chesapeake, 212.
Graves, Admiral, to aid of Cornwallis, 212.
"Great Awakening," the, 150.
Great Meadows, 122.
Greeks and sphericity of the earth, 26.
Greeley, Horace, on emancipation, 579;
on Jefferson Davis's bond, 641 ; nomi-
nated by liberal republicans, 648 ; indorsed
by the democrats, 648 ; death of, 649.
Green, Duff, 402.
Greenback Party, 697, 698, 702.
Greene, Nathaniel, at Bunker Hill, 182;
at Brooklyn, 189; at Forts Washington
and Lee, 191 ; in command in the South,
208; retreat in North Carolina, 209; at
Guilford Courthouse, 210; returns to
South Carolina, 210; success in the
South, 211.
Greenville, Fort, treaty of, 263.
Grenville, George, colonial policy of, 162-
164
Grenville, Sir Richard, at Roanoke Island,
42.
Groveton, Jackson at, 552.
Guadaloupe Hidalgo, treaty of, 450.
Guadeloupe, not ceded in 1763, 129.
Guantanamo, seized, 795.
Guerriere, the, and impressments, 317 ; taken
by the Constitution, 327.
Guilford Courthouse, battle of, 210.
Habeas Corpus, suspension of, 585, 586;
act concerning, 613.
Hahn, Governor, in Louisiana, 597.
" Hair Buyer," the, 203, 204.
Hakluyt, Richard, and Virginia colonization,
44-
Hale, John P., 452; nominated in 1852.
485-
Hale, Nathan, 190.
"Half-Breeds," 695.
"Halfway Covenant," the, 150.
Halleck, General, commands in the West,
INDEX
865
527; takes Corinth, 529; called to Wash-
ington, 530 ; and Pope, 550.
Hamet, 295.
Hamilton, the "Hair Buyer," 203, 204.
Hamilton, Alexander, at Yorktown, 213;
desires strong government, 223; defends a
tory, 231; plan in constitutional conven-
tion, 243; and the "Federalist," 247; on
ratification, 249 ; secretary of the treasury,
257 ; financial system, 259-261 ; and the
bank, 261 ; his nationalism, 261 ; and the
whisky insurrection, 267-269; and feder-
alist party, 270; and Washington, 271;
opposed to Adams, 273, 276, 282, 287,
289; private character attacked, 278;
and command of army, 281 ; defeats
Burr, 289 ; compared with Gallatin, 294 ;
defeats Burr's plots, 301 ; killed by Burr,
301.
Hampton, Wade, 324; and South Carolina
governorship, 655, 657, 694.
Hampton Roads, reached by the Virginia
colonists, 46.
Hampton Roads conference, 566.
Hancock, John, colonial leader, 172; and
Shays's Rebellion, 236; and ratification,
248.
Hancock, W. S., military governor, 623 ;
nominated for presidency, 702.
Hanna, M. A., and McKinley, 1896, 760;
suggested for nomination in 1904, 832.
Harding, Sir John, and the Alabama, 523.
Harlem, battle of, 190.
Harmar, Fort, treaty of, 262.
Harmon, Judson, candidate for nomination,
845, 846.
Harper's Ferry, John Brown at, 502-504;
captured by Jackson, 554.
Harrisburg, threatened by Ewell, 559.
Harrison, Benjamin, and the civil service,
709 ; nominated, 722 ; elected, 723 ; cabinet,
723; not popular, 748; and Elaine, 749;
split with Quay, 749; renominated, 749;
defeated, 750; maintaining the reserve,
752 ; and Hawaii, 773.
Harrison, W. H., at Tippecanoe, 318; on
the Canadian frontier, 323 ; recovers
Detroit, 323; at battle of the Thames,
323; and the land sales, 343; supported
for presidency, 1836, 425; elected presi-
dent, 434; death of, 435.
Harrison's Landing, 549.
Hartford, settled by Dutch, 69; arrival of
English, 69; expulsion of Dutch, 75.
Harvard College founded, 153; curriculum,
153-
Harvard University, development of, 480.
3*
Havana, taken by the British, 129.
Haverhill, taken by French and Indians, 117.
Hawaii, early history, 771 ; work of mis-
sionaries, 772 ; treaty with, 772 ; revolu-
tion of 1893, 772 ; annexation refused,
772. 773 J annexation accomplished, 773 ;
present status, 774.
Hawkins, Captain John, and the slave trade,
41.
Hay, John, treaty with England, 817 ; con-
vention with Herran, 818; treaty with
Panama, 820; and China, 822-824.
Hayes, R. B., nominated, 653; disputed
returns, 654; declared elected, 657;
attitude toward South, 658, 693, 694-
695 ; cabinet, 694 ; a divided party, 695 ;
as president, 703 ; and civil service reform,
708; and an isthmian canal, 816.
Hayes, Mrs., in the White House, 703.
Haymarket anarchists, 742.
Hayne, R. Y., in debate with Webster,
396-398.
Hayne-Webster debate, 396-398.
Hay-Pauncefote treaty, 817.
Hayti, discovered, 29; settled, 30, 31.
Hearst, W. R., 835.
Heath, Sir Robert, 52.
Helper, H. R., his "Impending Crisis," 504.
Hendricks, Thomas A., nominated for vice-
presidency, 653, 716.
Henry, Fort, captured, 527.
Henry, John, 335.
Henry, Patrick, resolutions on stamp act,
1 66; committee of correspondence, 174;
and George Rogers Clark, 203; opposes
ratification, 249 ; on amendments, 257.
Hepburn rate-bill, 833.
Hepburn v. Griswold, 663.
Herkimer, General, 196.
Highlanders, settled in the colonies, 147.
Hill, A. P., at Mechanicsville, 548; in Gettys-
burg campaign, 558, 559, 560.
Hill, D. B., opposed to Cleveland, 720;
governor of New York, 720; waives oppo-
sition to Cleveland, 722; and the Cleve-
land vote, 723; candidate for nomination,
750; speech at Chicago convention, 759.
Hill, D. H., at Mechanicsville, 548; lost
dispatch to, 554.
Hillsborough, Lord, secretary of the colonies,
171.
Hoar, E. R., attorney-general, 644; dis-
missed, 645.
Hobson, R. P., at Santiago, 794.
Hojeda, 31, 32, 36.
Holden, W. W., Governor, 600; appeals to
martial law, 631 ; impeached, 632.
866
INDEX
Holland. See Dutch.
Hood, General, succeeds Johnston, 537 ;
fights around Atlanta, 537 ; threatens
Sherman's base, 537 ; movement against
Nashville, 538; beaten, 539.
Hooker, General, in Tennessee, 534; at
Lookout Mountain, 534; at Fredericks-
burg, 557 ; in command, 557 ; Chancellors-
ville, 557-558.
Hooker, Rev. Thomas, 69.
Hornet, the, sinks the Peacock, 327.
Horse Shoe Bend, battle of, 332.
"Hortalez et Cie," 198.
Houston, Sam, in Texas, 421.
Howard, General, at Chancellorsville, 558.
Howe, Elias, 465.
Howe, General George, death of, 126.
Howe, General William, at Bunker Hill,
181 ; succeeds Gage, 182 ; operations at
New York, 188-191; Philadelphia cam-
paign, 194-195; superseded, 200; battle
of Monmouth, 200; not in cooperation
with Burgoyne, 193, 195 ; expedition
against Philadelphia, 193-194.
Howe, Lord, off New York, 188; meets
d'Estaing, 201.
"Hubbell, My dear," 704.
Hudson, Henry, explorations of, 72.
Hudson Bay Company, founded, 119.
Hudson river, desired by France, 116.
Huguenots, in South Carolina, 83; settled
in colonies, 145.
Hull, Captain Isaac, 327.
Hull, General, at Detroit, 322.
Humphreys, Governor, removed from office,
623.
Hunkers, 451 ; at convention of 1848,
452.
Hurons, and the French, 113.
Hutchinson, Mrs. Anne, her heresy, 66;
trial, 67 ; banished, 67 ; death, 67.
Hutchinson, Chief Justice, 167.
Hyde, Edward. See Lord Cornbury.
Idaho, territory and state, 678, 680, 748.
Illinois, territory created, 344; county of,
204 ; Black Hawk war, 466.
Immigration, 1815-1861, 461-462; distribu-
tion of, 462 ; and politics, 462 ; growth
after civil war, 665; Chinese, 774; Japan-
ese, 776.
Impeachment of Johnson, collecting evi-
dence, 613; the trial, 615-617.
Impressment of seamen, 306; a cause of
war, 313; and Chesapeake-Leopard affair,
314; negotiations concerning, 315; not
settled at Ghent, 334.
Income tax, amendment suggested, 838;
adopted, 838.
Independence, two groups of opinion, 186,
187; states recommend, 187; declara-
tion of, 187.
Independents, the, as a political force, 693 ;
relation to civil service reform, 707-708 ;
in campaign of 1884, 718.
Indians, hold back the frontier, 2; and
early man, 12; classification of, 13-15;
Algonquian family, 13 ; Iroquoian family,
14; Muskhogean family, 14; Siouan
family, 14; Caddoan family, 14; Sho-
shonean family, 14; Shahaptian family,
14; Salishan family, 14; Athapascan
family, 14; Eskimauan family, 14; Pa-
cific coast tribes, 15; culture of, 15-21;
government, 15-17; the clan, 15; the
sachem, 16; the chief, 16; the council,
16; the brotherhood, 17; names, 17;
wars, 17; leading tribes, 18; wars against
whites, 18; character, 19; mind, 19;
religion, 19; mythology, 20; houses, 20;
pueblos, 20; and civilization, 21; present
state, 21 ; called such by Columbus, 29;
enslaved, 30; harsh treatment by Span-
iards, 30; of Virginia, 47, 48; wars in
Virginia, 51 ; relations with Plymouth
colony, 6 1 ; Pequot war, 70; war against
New Netherland, 73; King Philip's war,
92; raids on New England, 116, 117,
1 1 8; relations with English, 121 ; Southern
friendship sought by France and England,
121 ; trade with Southern, 121 ; Cherokeea
at war, 1759, 130; treaty at Fort Niagara,
132 ; war in Ohio, 262 ; treaty of Green-
ville, 263; depredations in the South>
265 ; punished by Tennesseeans, 265 ;
plans of Tecumseh, 318; the Southern,
318; Creeks subdued, 332; Northwestern
pressed back, 344; Seminole war, 368;
in Georgia, 400; status of a tribe, 400;
process of removal, 465-468; Black
Hawk war, 466; reservation system,
468; of the Far West, 683-689; arrival
of white men, 683; game destroyed,
683 ; far western tribes, 683 ; wars of,
684-689; commission of 1867-1868, 685;
Sioux commission, 688 ; treaties not to be
made with, 690; Dawes act, 690; Burke
act, 690; late policy, 690, 691.
Indiana, territory created, 344.
Indiana, the, 800, 801.
Indian territory, conditions of, 467.
Indigo, a staple crop, 8.
Industrial combinations. See Combina-
tions.
INDEX
86;
Industry, after the revolution, 225 ; after
civil war, 664-666.
Inhabitants, early, 11-13.
Injunctions, use against strikers, 744.
"Insular Cases," 814.
Insurance, life, investigating the companies,
833.
Insurgents, the, origin of, 837 ; victory over
Cannon, 838; in campaign of 1912, 843;
found the progressive party, 847.
Internal improvements, policy of, 365 ;
bonus bill vetoed, 365 ; by the states,
366; checked by Jackson, 394-396;
Cumberland road bill, 395; Calhoun's
report on, 395 ; later history of, 396.
Interstate commerce act, 735 ; powers of
commission increased, 833, 839.
Iowa, a state, 463.
Iowa, the, 800, 801.
Iron, deposits, 8, 10; early manufacture
of, 10.
Iroquois, 18; attitude toward French, 112;
power of, 113; relations with the English,
114; Frontenac and, 117, 118; recognized
as British subjects, 119; and the Albany
congress, 122.
Irrigation, 849.
Island No. 10, 529.
Isthmian canal, and Clayton-Bulwer treaty,
458.
Isthmian canal project, early history of,
814-817; French canal, 815-816; Hayes's
idea, 816; Nicaraguan, 817; Panama,
817-818, 821-822.
Italy, and Mafia incident, 767.
Itata, the, 769.
Jackson, Andrew, and Burr, 304; to serve
against Florida, 332 ; conquers the Creeks,
332; at Pensacola, 332; New Orleans
campaign, 332-334; enters Florida, 369;
attacked by Clay, 370; candidate for
presidency, 1824, 377, 378, 379-380;
his party in 1825-1829, 382 ; attack on
Adams, 384; as party leader, 388; party
demands, 389 ; elected, 390 ; inaugurated,
392 ; his cabinet, 392 ; checks internal
improvements, 394-396; "Union" toast,
399; attitude toward Georgia, 400; open
breach with Calhoun, 401 ; cabinet reor-
ganized, 402 ; renominated, 402, 404 ;
elected, 405 ; denounces nullification,
408; and the "force bill," 410; "war
against the bank, 411-415; idea of a
bank, 412; resolutions of censure, 415;
and West India Trade, 415-417; the
French claims, 417-419; and the surplus,
424 ; on Van Buren's Texas letter, 442 ;
Georgia Indians removed, 466; relation
to democratic reform, 474.
Tackson, F. J., minister from England,
316, 335.
Tackson, Fort, treaty of, 332.
Tackson, Stonewall, at Bull Run, 519;
diversion in the valley, 547 ; at Cedar
Mountain, 551; takes Harper's Ferry,
554; at Antietam, 555 ; at Fredericksburg,
556; at Chancellorsville, 557; death of,
558.
Jackson, Mississippi, captured by Grant,
James I, and the colonies, 76.
Jameson, J. Franklin, and Venezuelan
boundary, 780.
James river, opened by the federals, 546;
McClellan reaches, 549.
Jamestown, settled, 47 ; early history, 47-
50 ; natural beauty, 47 ; disease at, 47 ;
starvation, 48 ; land distributed, 49.
Japan, relations with, 775-777 ; war with
Russia, 824; at treaty of Portsmouth,
824.
Jay, John, peace commissioner, 214; and
the "Federalist," 247; on ratification,
249; negotiates treaty, 272.
Jay Cooke and Co., failure of, 666.
Jefferson, Thomas, 174; and the declaration
of independence, 187 ; and Northwest, 232 ;
secretary of state, 257 ; and assumption,
260 ; against the bank, 261 ; forms republi-
can party, 270 ; leaves cabinet, 271 ; elected
vice-president, 274; and election of 1796,
274; declines French ministry, 276;
reply to alien and sedition laws, 285;
elected president, 288-200; views of,
291-292 ; inaugurated, 291-292 ; cabinet,
292 ; appointments, 292 ; and the federal
courts, 294; and Louisiana purchase,
296—299 ; popularity of, 300 ; and Burr,
300 ; and Randolph, 301 ; reflected, 302 ;
and trade restrictions, 307-311; and
Monroe treaty, 310; and embargo act,
310-311 ; on the Chesapeake-Leopard affair,
315; failure of his gunboats, 326.
Jefferson and the state university, 479.
Jenckes, Thomas, and civil service reform,
707.
Jenkins, Governor, removed, 623.
Jesuits, in Canada, 113.
Jews, in the colonies, 147.
Johnson, Andrew, nominated for vice-presi-
dency, 584, 599; as president, 599; his
plan of reconstruction, 599-601 ; relations
with his cabinet, 600; amnesty of, 600;
868
INDEX
popularity in 1865, 604; projected party,
604 ; vetoes freedmen's bureau bill, 605 ;
popularity wanes, 605 ; vetoes civil rights
bill, 606; enforces congressional recon-
struction, 611; " swinging-around-the-cir-
cle," 6n; impeachment of, 613-617;
acquittal, 616-617; and negro suffrage,
622.
Johnson, Hiram, nominated for vice-pres-
idency, 847.
Johnson, Reverdy, 670.
Johnson, R. M., 318; elected vice-president,
425-
Johnson, Sir William, 124.
Johnson-Clarendon convention, 670.
Johnston, A. S., defense of Nashville, 528;
falls back to Corinth, 528; attacks at
Shiloh, 528; killed, 528.
Johnston, Joseph E., at Bull Run, 519;
against Grant at Vicksburg, 531 ; succeeds
Bragg, 535 ; operations against Sherman,
535-537; removed, 537; restored to com-
mand, 539; before Sherman in North
Carolina, 540, 541 ; defending Richmond,
545 ; wounded at Seven Pines, 548 ;
surrenders to Sherman, 568.
Joliet, reaches the Mississippi, 114.
Jones, John Paul, 205.
Jones, Willie, and John Paul Jones, 205.
Jury, the negro on, 637.
Kalakaua, king of Hawaii, 772.
Kalb, arrival in America, 198; killed at
Camden, 208.
Kansas, struggle for, 489-493 ; two streams
of settlers, 483; two governments, 483-
490; statehood suggested, 490; Kansas
debate, 490 ; violence in, 491 ; failure
of Governor Walker, 492 ; Lecompton
constitution, 492 ; the English bill, 493 ;
admitted to the union, 493.
Kansas-Nebraska act, origin of, 486;
passed, 487; significance, 487; conse-
quences, 489.
Kaskaskia, 343 ; taken by Clark, 204.
Kearny, General, expedition to California,
448.
Kearney, Phil, killed in battle, 553.
Kennebec, colony on, 46.
Kennesaw Mountain, battle of, 536.
Kent, General, at Santiago, 796, 797, 798.
Kent's Island, 55.
Kentucky, Indians attack, 203 ; aid given
against Ferguson, 208; settled, 232, 233;
a state, 264; threatened rebellion of,
264; and parties, 271; struggle for union
in, 517; defense of, 527; Bragg in, 529.
Kentucky resolutions, 285-287.
Key West, American fleet at, 793.
Kidnapping, 137.
Kieft, William, governor of New Amster-
dam, 73.
King, W. R., elected vice-president, 485.
King George's War, 120.
King's Mountain, battle of, 208.
King William's War, 116.
"Kitchen Cabinet," 393.
Knights of Labor, early history, 741 ; violent
element, 742 ; and St. Louis strike, 742 ;
and Chicago strike, 742 ; decline of, 743.
"Know Ye" resolutions, 236.
Know-Nothing party, origin, 493 ; failure of,
494.
Knox, Henry, secretary of war, 257 ; supports
Hamilton, 261 ; and new army, 281.
Ku Klux act, of 1871, 629, 634.
Ku Klux Klan, history of, 627-630 ; methods,
628 ; organization, 628; congress interferes,
629 ; achievement of, 629 ; connected with
politics, 630; in North Carolina, 631.
Labor, white servants, 137; redemptioners,
146; department of, 851.
Ladrone Islands, 805, 806.
Lafayette, Marquis, volunteers, 198; at
Monmouth, 200; in Virginia, 211.
La Folette, Senator, presidential candidate,
843.
Lake George, battle of, 124.
Lamar, L. Q. C., on Seward, 507; in Cleve-
land's cabinet, 720.
Land, bottom, 2,7; distributed in Plymouth,
6 1 ; distribution of, in Virginia, 49; return
from, in early Virginia, 50; patroons in
New Netherland, 73 ; distribution of,
134; taking it up, 136; Western, 231-234;
surrendered by states, 231 ; sale of, 232,
342, 343; military grants, 342; great
companies, 342 ; Southwestern, 345.
Lane, Ralph, and Roanoke Island, 42.
Lansing skulls, 12.
La Salle, explores the Mississippi, 114.
Las Guasimas, 796.
Laudonniere, leads colony to Florida, in.
Laurens, Henry, peace commissioner, 214.
Lawrence, Captain, 327.
Lawrence, Kansas, attacked, 491.
Lawton, General, at Santiago, 796, 797, 798 ;
carries El Caney, 798.
Lecompton constitution, the, 492; Douglas
opposes, 492; defeated, 493.
Lee, Arthur, in Paris, 198.
Lee, Fort, 188, 191.
Lee, General Charles, in New York cam-
INDEX
869
paign, 191 ; his character, 197; at Mon-
mouth, 200; dismissed, 200; on Gates,
207.
Lee, R. E., repulsed in West Virginia, 526;
as commander, 545 ; takes command, 548 ;
defeats McClellan, 548-540 ; moves against
Pope, 551-553; the Antietam campaign,
553-555; at Fredericksburg, 555-557;
at Chancellorsville, 557-558; invasion of
Pennsylvania, 558; in Gettysburg cam-
paign, 558-562 ; his generalship, 562 ;
at the Wilderness, 563 ; at Spottsylvania,
563 ; at Cold Harbor, 563 ; evacuates
Richmond, 566 ; surrenders, 567 ; captures
John Brown, 503.
Lee, R. H., resolution? in continental con-
gress, 187; on ratification, 249.
Lee, the, 182.
Legal tender, retiring the notes, 662 ;
decisions on, 663-664; redemption of,
668; more demanded, 668; resumption
act, 669.
Legal tender act, 574.
Leif Ericsson, 23.
Leisler, Jacob, initiates revolution, 96;
defeat of, 102.
Leopard, attacked by Chesapeake, 314.
Lepe, Diego de, 32.
LeVis, attacks Quebec, 128.
Lewis, Meri wether, explorations, 356.
Lewis, W. B., in "Kitchen Cabinet,"
393.
Lewis and Clark, explorations, 355.
Lexington, battle of, 180.
Liberal republicans, origin of, 648 ; nominate
Greeley, 648.
Liliuokalani, Queen, 772, 773.
Linares, General, defender of Santiago,
796, 797 ; errors of, 802.
Lincoln, Abraham, in debate with Douglas,
499-503; "House divided" speech, 500;
destroying Douglas, 501 ; nominated for
presidency, 508 ; elected, 509 ; attitude
toward secession, 514; first inaugural,
515; calls for volunteers, 517; and Mc-
Clellan, 545, 546, 549; and emancipation,
577-581 ; at Hampton Roads, 566 ;
assassinated, 568; his greatness, 568;
war policy criticized, 581, 582 ; his renom-
ination opposed, 583; renominated, 584;
reelected, 584; military law, 585, 586;
plan of reconstruction, 596-599; amnesty
proclamation, 596 ; and the Wade-Davis
bill, 597 ; and negro suffrage, 597, 622.
Lincoln-Douglas debates, 499-502 ; effect of,
502.
Lincoln, General, at Charleston, 207 ; receives
Cornwallis's sword, 213; and Shays's
Rebellion, 236.
Little Big Horn, battle of, 688.
Little Sarah, the, 267.
Livingston, Edward, minister to Paris,
418.
Livingston, Robert R., 187; on ratification,
249; and Louisiana purchase, 297-299.
"Locofocos," 433.
Lodge, H. C., in campaign of 1884, 716.
Logan, General J. A., nominated for vice-
presidency, 716.
Logan, James A., culture of, 155.
London Company, created, 45, 46 ; reformed,
50; services to Virginia, 51; and Mary-
land settlement, 52 ; and Pilgrims, 52,
59-
Longstreet, General, at Chickamauga,
533; at Knoxville, 534; at second
Bull Run, 552 ; at Fredericksburg,
556; in Gettysburg campaign, 559,
560, 561.
Lookout Mountain, capture of, 534.
Lords of Trade, 77.
Lorimer, Senator, investigation, 842.
Loudon, Fort, captured, 130.
Louisburg, taken by colonials, 120; futile
expedition against, 125 ; taken, 125, 126.
Louisiana, early history, 115; purchase of,
296-299 ; boundaries of, 299 ; and Burr's
scheme, 304 ; territory of, 345 ; territory
of Orleans, 345 ; admitted to union, 345 ;
population of, 1810, 345 ; reconstructed
under Lincoln, 596 ; readmitted, 624 ;
republicans overthrown, 633 ; disputed
returns in 1876, 655, 657 ; surrendered
to democrats, 657.
Louis XIV, and New France, 115.
Lowndes, William, elected to congress, 318;
on the tariff, 364.
Lumber industry, 6.
Lundy, Benjamin, work of, 428.
Lundy's Lane, battle of, 325.
Lutheran Church, 354.
Lyon, General, and Missouri secessionists,
517, 526; death of, 526; defense of Mis-
souri, 541.
Lyttleton, Governor, and Cherokee war
130.
McCardle, ex parte, case of, 613.
McClellan, General, in West Virginia, 520,
526 ; in command in Virginia, 545 ; tardi-
ness, 545 ; in the Peninsular campaign,
546-550 ; controversy over, 550 ; in the
Antietam campaign, 554 ; nominated
for presidency, 584.
8yo
INDEX
McCormick reaper, invented, 465.
McCulloch, Hugh, as financier., 660; his
refunding plans, 66 1.
McCulloch v. Maryland, case of, 359.
MacDonald, Donald, 183.
MacDonough, Captain, victory on Lake
Champlain, 325.
McDowell, General, in Bull Run campaign,
519; and McClellan, 546, 547; at second
Bull Run, 554.
Macedonian, the, 327, 328. •
McGillivray, Alexander, 265.
McHenry, Fort, defended against British,
330.
McHenry, James, dismissed from the cabinet,
287.
McKinley, William, Jr., and the civil service,
711; and the tariff, 715; as leader, 723;
his tariff bill, 724-726; effect of, 727;
nominated, 1896, 760; campaign of, 761;
elected, 762 ; attitude toward Spain,
787, 789 ; and the Maine, 788 ; demands
armistice in Cuba, 789; suggests war,
789; responsible for Manila, 792; and
Schley-Sampson controversy, 804; and
acquisition of the Philippines, 805;
reflected, 827 ; death of, 827; later policy
of, 829.
McKinley tariff and Sherman silver law,
747-
McLane, Lewis, and the bank, 412, 413;
and West Indian trade, 417.
McLean, J. J., for president, 425 ; in Dred
Scott case, 498.
Macomb, General, 325.
Maqon, Nathaniel, speaker, 303; "M aeon's
Bill No. 2," 311, 313.
"Macon's Bill No. 2," 311, 313, 317.
Madison, on Potomac smugglers, 241 ;
"Notes" on constitutional debates, 242;
author of Virginia plan, 243 ; and the
"Federalist," 247; supports ratification,
249; and first revenue bill, 257; position
on refunding, 259; retaliatory resolu-
tions, 272; declines French ministry, 276;
and Virginia Resolutions, 285-287; sec-
retary of state, 292 ; disliked by Randolph,
302 ; elected president, 311; hoodwinked
by Napoleon, 317; favors war party,
319; renominated, 319; reelected, 319.
Mafia Incident, 767.
Magellan, voyage of, 33.
Mails, use for antislavery literature, 430.
Maine, early settlements in, 62, 70; hold of
British in, 331 ; a state, 373 ; boundary
dispute, 437-438; prohibition in, 480.
Maine, the, destroyed at Havana, 787, 788.
Maiden, Fort, 321; Hull before, 322; evac-
uated, 323.
Malvern Hill, battle of, 549.
Manassas, battle of, 552.
Mangum, W. P., 426.
Manhattan Island. See New York.
Manila, battle of, 791 ; holding the bay,
792; Aguinaldo at, 809; capture of, 792,
809.
Manley, John, 182.
Manufactures, colonial, 140; British restric-
tions on, 141 ; new era of, 348 ; early,
349 ; effect of embargo, 349 ; effect on
society, 349 ; demand a tariff, 364, 384—
386 ; growth of, 463 ; combination in,
736-740.
Maps of America, early, 36.
Marbois, and Louisiana purchase, 299.
Marbury v. Madison, case of, 357.
Marco Polo, 26.
Marcy, W. L., a Hunker, 451.
Maria Teresa, the, 800, 801.
Marietta, settled, 342.
Marion, partisan leader, 207 ; under Greene,
210.
Marquette, Father, reaches the Mississippi,
114.
Marshall, John, on ratification, 249; com-
missioner to France, 279; secretary of
state, 276, 287; Chief Justice, 291; at
Burr's trial, 305 ; influence on the constitu-
tion, 357-360.
Marshall, Thomas R., nominated for vice-
president, 847.
Martin, Luther, 242, 245.
Martinique, not ceded in 1763, 129.
Marye's Heights, 556.
Maryland, early history, 52-57; government
of, 53, 54 ; religious toleration, 53 ; first
colony, 53, 54; the assembly, 54; manors
in, 55 ; Jesuits in, 55 ; struggle for Kent's
Island, 55 ; and Virginia politics, 56 ;
civil war in, 57 ; toleration act of 1649,
57 ; battle of Providence, 57 ; and the
restoration, 80; reactionary government
under Charles Calvert, 88; revolution,
89, 97; trade, 142; religion in, 151; and
western lands, 232 ; confers with Virginia
on trade, 241; struggle for union in, 517;
Lee invades, 553-555; military arrests
in, 585-
Mason, Captain John, 62, 70.
Mason, George, on ratification, 249.
Mason and Slidell, seized on the Trent, 522.
Massachusetts, early settlements in, 62, 63.
Massachusetts, and New England confeder-
ation, 71; during the restoration period,
INDEX
871
80 ; charter annulled, 93 ; and the Dom-
inion of New England, 94 ; rule of Andros,
93-9S ; overthrow of Andros, 96 ; new char-
ter, 97 ; salary controversy, 101 ; and paper
money, 158; resists stamp act, 167;
resists quartering troops, 169; in the
revolutionary quarrel, 170; parliament
censures, 171; troops sent, 171; com-
mittees appointed, 174; charter changed
by parliament, 176; general sympathy for,
177; Shays's Rebellion, 236; ratines the
constitution, 248; public schools in, 476;
work of Horace Mann, 477 ; cedes Maine,
373-
Massachusetts, the, 800, 801.
Massachusetts Bay, colony of, charter, 63 ;
population, 64; early government, 64;
the franchise, 65 ; suspected by the king,
66. See Massachusetts.
Massasoit, 61.
Matamoras, taken by Taylor, 447.
Mather, Rev. Cotton, and witchcraft, 149.
Mather, Rev. Increase, and witches, 149.
Mayflower, voyage of, 60.
"Mayflower Compact," the, 61.
Maysville veto, 395.
Meade, General, in command, 559; in
Gettysburg campaign, 559-562.
"Meat Trust," 839.
Mechanicsville, battle of, 548.
Mecklenburg county, resolves of, 180.
"Mediterranean Fund," 293.
Menendez, Pedro, in.
Merrimac, the, 569; sunk at Santiago, 794.
Merritt, Wesley, at Manila, 792, 810.
Methodist Church, founded in America,
353 ; divided by slavery, 456, 471.
Mexico, conquest of, 37 ; and Burr's scheme,
304; early relations with. Texas, 419;
refuses to sell Texas, 420; refuses to sell
California, 446 ; war with, 446—450 ; city
of, taken, 450; treaty with, 450; French
in, 589, 643.
Michigan, territory created, 344; a state,
463-
Mifflin, Governor, and whisky insurrection,
268.
Milan Decree, 309.
Miles, N. A., and Jefferson Davis, 64;
takes Porto Rico, 801.
Military government established in the
South, 600-611, 622-625; supreme court
on, 612, 613; reestablished in the South,
622-625.
Military law, in civil war, 581, 585, 586.
Milligan, ex parte, case of, 612.
"Millionaires panic," 739.
Mineral oils, 10.
Minerals, 8-n.
Mining, in the Far West, 677-680; condi-
tions, 678; laws, 678.
Minnesota, a state, 463.
Minuit, Peter, governor of New Amsterdam,
72 ; in Delaware, 75.
Missionary Ridge, battle of, 535.
Mississippi, territory created, 344; popula-
tion, 1820, 345 ; new Black Code in, 602 ;
Governor Humphreys removed , 623 ;
readmitted, 625 ; republicans overthrown,
632; the "Mississippi plan," 632.
Mississippi river, as a means of transporta-
tion, 2; explored by French, 114; opened
north and south, 529; opened at Vicks-
burg, 532.
Mississippi v. Johnson, case of, 612.
Missouri, territory created, 345 ; develop-
ment of, 371 ; asks for statehood, 371 ;
compromise, 373; constitution of, 374;
interest in Nebraska, 486; attempt to
settle Kansas, 489; struggle for union
in, 517, 526, 541-542.
Missouri Compromise, adopted, 371-374.
Mobile, desire to annex, 321 ; occupied, 332.
Mobile Act, 300.
Mobile Bay, defenses taken, 571.
Mohawk river and transportation system, 3.
Mohawks, 113.
"Molasses Act," 144; renewed, 163.
Molino del Rey, battle at, 450.
Monck's Corners, 211.
Money, continental, 223; paper, after the
revolution, 236. See Paper money.
Monhegan, 61.
Monitor, contest with the Virginia, 546,
*o.
Monmouth, battle of, 200.
Monocacy, battle of, 565.
Monroe, James, mission to France, 1794,
277; his blow at Hamilton, 278; and the
purchase of Louisiana, 299 ; and Randolph,
302, 303; makes treaty, 310; secretary of
state, 317, 330; elected president, 366;
cabinet, 367 ; and Spanish- American
states, 367 ; and parties, 368 ; reflected,
368; and internal improvements, 395.
Monroe Doctrine, origin of, 374; England's
relation to, 375 ; Adams's part, 375 ; Rus-
sia's relation to, 375 ; announced, 377 ;
new meaning in Venezuelan incident,
778-781 ; and the Venezuelan incident,
778-779, 780-781, 826 ; Roosevelt on, 827.
Montana, settled, 678 ; a territory and state,
678, 680, 748.
Montcalm, Marquis de, takes Fort William
872
INDEX
Henry, 125; impeded in Canada, 126;
defense of Quebec, 127 ; death, 127.
Monterey, taken by Taylor, 447.
Monterey, the, at Manila, 792.
Montgomery, Colonel, against the Cherokees,
130.
Montgomery, Richard, in Canada, 184.
Montgomery, Ala., confederacy organized
at, 511.
Montreal, site discovered, 36; attempt to
take, 116; taken by British, 128; position
of, 321; expedition against, 322.
Moravians, settlements of, 147.
Morgan, General, at Cowpens, 208; pur-
sued by Tarleton, 209 ; retreat of, 209.
Morgan, J. P., system of banks, 740; and
bond sales under Cleveland, 756-757.
Morgan, William, against masonry, 403.
Morgan, Fort, taken, 571.
Morris, Gouverneur, and union, 223 ; min-
ister to England, 262 ; minister to France,
277.
Morris, Robert, superintendent of finances,
228.
Morris, Captain, in Tripolitan war, 295.
Morse, invents telegraph, 465.
Morton, L. P., vice-president, 722.
Morton, O. P., influence at Washington,
633; and renomination of Grant, 653.
Motley, J. L., recall of, 645.
Moultrie, Col., defends Charleston, 183.
"Mound Builders," the, 12.
Mounds, 12.
"Mulligan Letters," 717.
Murfreesboro, Buel, at, 529; battle of,
530.
Murray, suggests treaty with France, 282.
|
Napoleon, and Louisiana, 297 ; and Florida,
302 ; restrictions on American trade, 307-
309; hoodwinks Madison, 316.
Narvaez, explorations of, 38.
Nashville Convention, 457.
Nashville, battle of, 539.
Nast, Thomas, in campaign of 1872, 649.
National republicans, 403.
National silver party, 761.
Native American movement, 462.
Naturalization, law of 1795, 283; law of
1798, 283 ; law of 1802, 283.
Natural resources, 4-11; preservation of,
849-850.
Nature, influence of, i.
Navigation Acts, ordinance of 1651, 78;
later acts, 81 ; in practice, 143 ; evaded,
144; to be enforced, 163; and the revolu-
tion, 163; and Massachusetts, 170; bear-
ing on post-revolutionary trade, 226;
receding, 416.
Navy, in the revolution, 204-206; against
France, 279, 281; seize French ships,
281 ; department of , created, 281 ; Jefferson,
and, 293; in war with Tripoli, 295; war
party favors, 319; condition of in 1812,
320, 326; naval warfare, 326-329; new
ships, 327, 328; after war of 1812, 363;
federal, in the civil war, 569-571 ; at New
Orleans, 529 ; liberal appropriations under
Harrison, 727.
Nebraska, demand for a territory of,
486.
Necessity, Fort, 122.
Neesima, J. H., work in Japan, 775.
Negroes. See Freedmen, 601.
Negro troops, 573; as prisoners, 573-574-
Neutrality proclamation, 266.
Nevada, settled, 677; state and territory,
677, 680.
New Amsterdam. See New York.
Newburg address, the, 223.
New England, council of, 61, 62 ; and New
Hampshire, 70; the town, 134; life in, 137;
trade in, 142; 163; religion in, 148, 150;
education, 153; local government in, 156;
privateers, 205 ; British sympathy in,
33i, 335-338; ignored by agricultural
states, 335; hopes from Canada, 335;
migration westward, 341 ; rise of manu-
factures, 349; disestablishment in, 355;
and the tariff, 385, 386-387.
New England confederation, origin of, 71 ;
constitution of, 71 ; decay of, 71.
New France, condition of , 1628, 1 1 2 ; explored,
in; settled, 112; Jesuits in, 113; and
Indian trade, 121 ; in the Ohio valley, 121.
New Haven, settled, 69 ; government of, 69 ;
united with New Haven, 80.
New Hampshire, early history, 62, 70; falls
to Massachusetts, 70 ; and the Dominion of
New England, 94; and the revolution,
97 ; ratines the constitution, 248.
New Jersey, created, 81, 85 ; East and West
Jersey, 85 ; granted to Duke of York, 85 ;
Quaker control, 85 ; and the Dominion
of New England, 94 ; and the revolution,
97 ; campaign in, 191 ; tories in, 191 ; recov-
ered, 192 ; ratines the constitution, 247.
New London, taken by Arnold, 212.
New Mexico, attempt of Polk to purchase,
446 ; occupied by Kearney, 448 ; not made
a territory, 453; made a territory, 455,
457; mining in, 678; territory and state,
680; statehood granted, 851.
New Netherland. See New York.
INDEX
873
New Orleans, campaign of, 332-334; capture
of, 529; Mafia riots at, 767.
Newport, Captain Christopher, in Virginia,
46, 48.
Newport, held by British, 192 ; siege of, 200.
Newspaper ownership, 842.
New York, explored and settled by Dutch,
72 ; patroon system, 73 ; disorders in, 73 ;
Indian wars, 73 ; government, 74 ; Eng-
lish settlers on Long Island, 75 ; acquired
by the English, 75 ; government, 83 ;
conquered by Dutch, 84 ; struggle for
an assembly, 84 ; and the Dominion of
New England, 94 ; Leisler revolution,
96, 102 • governor's salary, 102 ; contest
for assembly, 103 ; money votes in, 103,
104 ; religion in, 152 ; mixed form of local
government, 156; "Duke's Law," 157;
stamp act congress, 167 ; resents quar-
tering troops, 169 ; assembly suspended,
170; operations around, 188-191 ; attitude
in constitutional convention, 244 ; ratifies
the constitution, 249; and parties, 270;
settlement of western, 341 ; constitutional
reform in, 473 ; public schools in, 477.
New York, the, 800, 80 1.
New York Central system, development of,
733, 734-
Niagara, Fort, expedition against, 124;
captured, 126; Indian treaty at, 132.
Nicaragua, canal through, 815, 816, 817.
Nicholson, Sir Francis, governor of New
York, 95, 96.
Nicolls, Col. Richard, governor of New York,
75 ; takes New Amsterdam, 76 ; approves
the " Duke's Laws," 83.
Ninety -six, 210, 211.
Nomination, presidential, by convention,
404 ; significance of, 404. See Caucus.
Non-importation, 1765, 167; revived, 170;
employed in 1774, 179; act of 1806, 309.
Non-slaveholders, 469.
Norfolk, burned, 186.
Norsemen, discoveries by, 234.
North and South, relative strength of,
518.
North, Lord, colonial policy of, 171 ; duty
on tea, 173 ; offers compromise, 1778, 199 ;
resigns, 214.
North Carolina, discovered by Spaniards,
31 ; colony at Roanoke Island, 42 ; settle-
ment of, 82 ; name, 82, 83 ; evolution of,
106 ; Gary rebellion, 107 ; Indian wars,
107; sale to crown, 107; quitrents, 107;
controversy over county representation,
135; trade, 143; race elements in, 146,
147; religion in, 151; resists stamp act,
1 68; Mecklenburg resolves, 180; loyalists
in, 182 ; regulators, 183 ; battle of Moore's
Creek, 183; authorizes independence,
186; against nullification, 410; Cornwallis
in, 208-210; American retreat in, 209;
ratifies the constitution, 249; and parties,
271; constitutional reform in, 474;
"free schools" in, 477; federal operations
in, 570; reconstructed by Johnson, 600;
readmitted, 624; Holden and martial
law, 631 ; republicans overthrown, 632.
North Dakota, a state, 748.
Northeast boundary adjusted, 437.
Northwest, conquered by Clark, 204.
Northwest Ordinance, the first, 232; the
second, 233 ; 343-
Nova Scotia, ceded to England, 129.
Novus Mundus; 32.
Nullification, and the Virginia-Kentucky
resolutions, 285-287; origin of, 385;
Calhoun's "Exposition," 387; the theory,
388; and Hayne- Webster debate, 399;
Georgia rejects, 400; attempt to execute,
407-410; ordinance of, 408; replevin act,
408; Jackson's proclamation, 409; sus-
pended, 410; compromise tariff, 410.
Oberlin College, antislavery center, 429.
Ocean currents, influence of, 2.
Oglethorpe, James, founds Georgia, 109;
governor, 109-110.
Ohio, French posts in, taken, 125 ; settlement
of, 232; territory of, 233; Indians at war,
262 ; lands opened to settlers, 263 ; settle-
ment of, 342 ; territory organized, 342 ;
population of, 343; admitted to union,
344-
Ohio Company, 232, 342.
"Ohio Idea," the, 642.
Ohio valley, French in, 121, 122.
Okechobee Swamp, battle of, 467.
Oklahoma, 467.
Olney, secretary, his Venezuelan dispatch,
778.
Olympia, the, at Manila, 791.
Omnibus Bill, 457.
Opechancanough, 5 2 .
Oquendo, the, 800, 801.
Orangeburg, 211.
Orders in Council, 308; repeal of, 319-320.
Oregon, explored by Lewis and Clark, 356;
condition of, 1841, 440; joint occupancy,
440 ; a political issue, 440 ; immigration to,
441; adjustment of the question, 445;
made a territory, 452; becomes a state,
463 ; disputed election returns of
655, 657; vote of in 1876, 696.
874
INDEX
Oregon, the, around Cape Horn, 794; at
Santiago, 800, 80 1.
Orient, American diplomacy in, 822-824.
Orinoco river, discovered, 30.
Oriskany, battle of, 196.
Osceola, 466.
Oswald, British peace commissioner, 214.
Otis, Harrison Gray, at Hartford convention,
337-
Otis, James, on American rights, 165; and
stamp act, 167; elected speaker, 169;
wounded, 172.
Outrages, Southern, 606; effects of, 606,
625.
Pacific, diplomacy of the, 764; importance
of, 764.-
Pacific Coast, harbors on, 3; Indians of, 15.
Pacific Ocean, discovered, 37.
Pacific railroad, and the .Kansas-Nebraska
act, 486.
Paine, Thomas, "Common Sense," 186.
Pakenham, General, at New Orleans, 333.
Palo Alto, battle of, 447.
Panama, route adopted, 818; revolution in,
818-820; republic of, 820; canal treaty,
820; sanitation in, 821.
Panama congress, 383.
Panic of 1837, 432.
Panic of 1857, 482; political effect of, 499.
Panic of 1873, 666, 667.
Panic of 1893, 729, 739, 753-
Panic of 1903, 739, 831.
Paper money, in the colonies, 157; after the
revolution, 236; in Rhode Island, 236;
and the Shays's Rebellion, 236.
Paris, treaty of, 129.
Parker, Alton B., nominated for presidency,
832 ; at Baltimore convention, 846.
Parson's cause, 166.
Parties, Washington and, 269.
Patronage, influence of, 1828, 389; under
Jackson, 393. See Civil Service Reform,
and Appointments to Office.
Patroon system, 73.
Patterson, plan of, in constitutional conven-
tion, 244.
Pawtucket, 349.
Payne-Aldrich bill, 837 ; political effects of,
837-838.
Peace, efforts to preserve, Crittenden com-
promise, 513; senate peace committee,
513; peace congress, 514.
Peace movement, confederate, 588.
Peach Tree Creek, battle of, 537.
Peacock, the, 327.
Pea Ridge, battle of, 542.
Peirpoint, F. H., government at Alexandria,
520, 596, 601.
Pelican, the, Drake's ship, 41.
Pell's Point, 190.
Pemberton, General, defense of Vicksburg,
531 ; surrenders, 532.
Pendleton, G. H., financial ideas, 642; and
nomination of 1868, 642.
Pendleton act, 709.
Peninsular campaign, 545.
Penn, family, late history of, 106.
Penn, John, 106.
Penn, William, interested in West Jersey,
85 ; charter for Pennsylvania, 85 ; as a
colonizer, 85-88 ; colony lost and restored,
88; grants "charter of privileges," 104.
Pennsylvania, charter, 85 ; settled, 86 ;
government, 86, 87; Indians conciliated,
86 ; Penn in the colony, 86, 87 ; boundary
controversy, 87, 97; political changes in,
104 ; new charter, 104 ; a militia organized,
105; Germans in, 146; Scotch-Irish in,
147; religion in, 152; university of, 154;
education in, 154,477; ratifies constitution,
247 ; the whisky insurrection, 267-269 ;
parties in, 270; public schools in, 477.
Pennsylvania railroad, development of,
733, 734-
Pensacola, occupied, 332, 369.
Pensions, policy of, 726; Tanner and, 749;
law of 1912, 851.
People's party, organized, 752.
Pepperell, William, takes Louisburg, 120.
Pequots, war with, 70.
Perry, Oliver H., victory on Lake Erie,
324-
Perry ville, battle of, 529.
Petersburg, siege of, 564, 566.
Petitions, antislavery, 431.
Philadelphia, founded, 86; population, 142;
culture of, 155; and tea duty, 175;
occupied by the British, 194, 199; evac-
uated, 200; congress forced to flee, 224;
seat of government at, 262.
Philadelphia, the, loss of, 293, 295, 296.
Philip, King, war against whites, 92.
Philippines, acquired by treaty of peace,
805, 806; under Spanish authority, 809;
revolt of Aguinaldo, 809; government
established, 810-812; assembly of, 812;
population of, 811; tariff relations, 812;
friar lands, 812. See Filipinos.
Phillips, Captain, 802.
Phillips, Wendell, Johnson's charges against,
605.
Phips, Governor, salary controversy, 101;
fails against Quebec, 117.
INDEX
875
Pickens, at Cowpens, 209; partisan leader,
207.
Pickens, Fort, relief of, 512.
Pickering, Judge, impeached, 294.
Pickering, Timothy, secretary of state, 271 ;
and Monroe's mission, 277, 278; desires
French war, 279 ; dismissed, 287 ; plots
with Burr, 300; and Rose, 315; and New
England discontent, 335-337.
Pickett's charge, 561-562.
Piedmont region of the South, 468.
Piegans, massacre of, 686.
Pi-Tee, Franklin, elected president, 485 ;
attitude toward Kansas, 490.
Pike, Zebulon, explorations of, 356.
Pike's Peak, named, 356.
Pilgrims, origin of, 59 ; in Leyden, 59 ; depart
for America, 60.
Pillow, Fort, taken, 574 ; negro prisoners at,
574-
Pinchot, Gifford, controversy with Ballinger,
838.
Pinckney, C. C., plan in constitutional
convention, 243 ; mission to France, 278-
280; command in new army, 281.
Pinckney, Thomas, Hamilton's plan to elect,
273-
Pinckney, William, in England, 309; makes
treaty, 310.
Pinzon, Vicente Yafiez, 32.
Pitt, Fort, held against the Indians, 131.
Pitt, William, and the Seven Years' War,
124, 125, 129, 130; on stamp act, 168; ill-
ness, 169; pleads for colonies, 176.
Pitt, William, the younger, and American
trade, 307.
Pittsburg, importance of, 3, 4 ; Fort Duquesne
established, 122; efforts of English to
take, 122-123.
Plain, the interior, i.
Platt, T. C., resigns senatorship, 704; returns
to senate, 704; for Elaine in 1884, 716;
as leader, 723.
Platt amendment, the, 807.
Plymouth, early history, 60-63; settlement
of, 60 ; early suffering in, 60 ; government
of, 61, 62 ; relation with Indians, 61 ; com-
mon stock, 6 1 ; religion of, 61 ; colony of,
60-63 ; charter and granc, 59, 61 ; con-
ditions of settlement, 60, 61 ; expansion,
62; government, 61, 62; reorganized, 62.
Plymouth Colony and New England Con-
federation, 71 ; and the Dominion of New
England, 94; joined with Massachusetts,
97-
Plymouth Company, created, 45, 46.
Pocahontas, 52.
Poland committee, the, 649.
Polk, James K., nominated, 442; elected,
443 ; his presidency, 445-452 ; and Oregon,
445; negotiations with Mexico, 446;
war with Mexico, 446-450.
Polly, the, case of, 307.
Pomeroy Circular, 584.
Ponce de Leon, 38.
Pontiac, at war with the whites, 131.
Pope, General, commands in Virginia, 550 ;
defeated at second Bull Run, 551-553;
as a commander, 553.
Popular sovereignty, defined, 454; in 1854,
486, 488; in Lincoln-Douglas debate,
SOL
Population, Virginia in 1616, 50; 1624, 51;
Maryland in 1660, 58; Plymouth Colony,
62; Massachusetts, 64; Philadelphia, 86;
of all the colonies, 1690, 100; in 1760, 101 ;
of South Carolina, 108 ; of North Carolina,
108; of New France, 113 ; colonial in 1760,
136; slaves in 1769; 139; Boston, 142;
Philadelphia, 142 ; New York, 142 ;
Charleston, 142 ; Baltimore, 142 ; growth,
1790-1815, 341; of Ohio, 343; of the
Northwest, 1820, 344; of Alabama and
Mississippi, 1820, 345; of North and
South, 1860, 461, 518; immigrants, 1860,
461 ; of slaves, 470 ; of Philippine Islands,
811.
Porter, Fitzjohn, at second Bull Run, 552.
Porto Rico, taken by Americans, 801 ; and
the Spanish treaty, 805, 806 ; civil govern-
ment in, 814.
Port Royal, Acadia, captured, 117; taken
by English, 118.
Port Royal, S. C., seized, 570.
Portsmouth, N. H., branch bank at, 411;
treaty of, 824.
Portugal, African, explorations of, 25 ;
American explorations, 34.
Postal Savings Banks, 839.
Potomac, smuggling on the, 241.
Potter, Bishop, on political ideals, 723.
Powderly, T. V., 741-
Powhatan, 48, 52.
Prairies, the soil, 7.
Preble, Captain, in Tripolitan war, 295.
Presbyterian Church, 354; divided by slav-
ery, 472.
Presbyterians, in the colonies, 148; in Vir-
ginia, 151.
President, constitutional status, 251, 258;
war powers of, 585-586.
President, the, 295, 328; and. Little Belt,
317.
"Prester John," 25,
8;6
INDEX
Prevost in the South, 207.
Price, Sterling, in Missouri, 541, 542; in
Arkansas, 541, 542.
Prices and panic of 1873, 667.
Prince Henry the Navigator, 25.
Princeton, battle of, 192.
Princeton College, founded, 154.
Privateers, in the revolution, 204 ; in the war
of 1812, 328.
Progressive party, founded, 847.
Prophet, the, 318.
Proprietary colony, the, described, 81.
Protestant Episcopal Church, organized,
354; of the confederacy, 472.
Pueblo Indians, 13.
Pujo Committee, 741, 851.
Pulaski, arrival in America, 198.
Pullman strike, 743.
Pure food law, 833.
Puritanism, origin and belief, 63 ; apology
for, 65; attitude toward Roger Williams,
65 ; weakening, 148.
Puritan Revolution and the colonies, 77.
Putnam, Israel, at battle of Brooklyn, 189.
Quakers, 353 ; in Massachusetts, 67, 68 ;
attitude toward oaths, 105 ; toward mili-
tary service, 105 ; in North Carolina,
107 ; in Virginia, 151.
Quay, M. S., as a leader, 723.
Quebec, site discovered, 36; founded, 112;
attempt to take, 1690, 116; Sir Hovenden
Walker's failure against, 118; taken by
Wolfe, 127; held by Murray, 128; be-
sieged by Montgomery and Arnold, 183.
"Quebec Act," 177.
Queen Anne's war, 118-119.
Queenstown, attacked, 323.
Queseda, Cuban leader, 782, 784.
Race, elements in colonies, 145-148.
Radicals, principles of, 597; Wade-Davis
bill, 598 ; Stanton and, 600 ; efforts against
Johnson, 605 ; and civil rights bill, 606 ;
and fourteenth amendment, 607 ; in con-
trol of congress, 608 ; and tenure-of-office
act, 611.
Railroads, early development, 464 ; construc-
tion after the war, 665 ; transcontinental,
680; Union Pacific, 680; Central Pacific,
680; Northern Pacific, 68 1 ; Atlantic and
Pacific, 68 1 ; Santa Fe, 682; Southern
Pacific, 682; Great Northern, 682; Con-
structing the Pacific roads, 682 ; land
grants abused, 682 ; combinations of,
732-735; in England, 732; combining
lines, 733; attempts at cooperation, 734;
"Granger laws," 734; railroads and inter-
state commerce act, 735; as a political
issue, 735; the Wabash case, 735; Hep-
burn rate bill, 833.
Rainfall, 2.
Raisin, the, the massacre at, 323.
"Raleigh, Citie of," 43.
Raleigh, Sir Walter, and colonization, 42-44.
Rail, Colonel, 192.
Rambouillet Decree, 316.
Randall, S. J., and the tariff, 714, 715, 721.
Randolph, Edmund, in constitutional con-
vention, 243 ; attorney-general, 257 ; sup-
ports Jefferson, 261 ; secretary of state,
271.
Randolph, Edward, and navigation acts, 93 ;
hostile to the charters, 93, 94; influence
on the new charter, 97.
Randolph, John, at impeachment of Chase,
294 ; opposed to Jefferson, 301 ; opposed
to Yazoo men, 301, 302 ; shorn of his
strength, 302, 303 ; supports Monroe, 302.
Rawdon, Lord, at Camden, 207 ; at Hob-
kirk's Hill, 210; in Charleston, 211.
Reciprocity, Elaine secures, 725; McKinley
on, 829; Canadian, 841, 842.
Reconstruction, question conies up in con-
gress, 585; two kinds, 594; theories of
status, 595 ; Lincoln's plan, 596-599 ;
Wade-Davis bill, 597-598; attitude of
South, 1865, 601, 602, 619; committee
on, 605 ; freedmen's bureau bill, 605 ;
civil rights bill, 606 ; the radical program,
609-611; acts of 1867, 609-611; acts
enforced in the South, 622-625.
Redemptioners, 146.
Red river expedition, 542.
Reed, Thomas B., on the tariff of 1883, 715 ;
as leader, 723; speaker, 724; breaks down
obstruction, 724.
Registration, Southern, 623.
Regulators, in North Carolina, 183.
Reid, Whitelaw, nominated for vice-presi-
dency, 749.
Religion, in Virginia, 46; in Maryland, 53;
Maryland Toleration Act, 57; and the
franchise in Massachusetts, 65; perse-
cutions in Massachusetts, 65-68; perse-
cution in New Netherland, 74; in the
colonies, 148-152; work of the churches,
148; in New England, 148; Witchcraft,
149; "Halfway Covenant," 150; the
"Great Awakening," 150; freedom in
Rhode Island, 151; Anglican Church, in
New England, 148; in the South, 151;
British Toleration Act, 152 ; treatment of
Catholics, 152; "Saybrook Platform,".
INDEX
877
153; churches and education, 154; estab-
lished churches, 352; Methodists, 353;
Baptists, 353 ; other churches, 354 ; Prot-
estant Episcopal Church, 354; Congrega-
tionalists, 354; Unitarian movement,
355 ; disestablishment in New England,
355-
Republicanism, inherent, 218, 228.
Republican party, relations with Gen6t,
266; formation of, 270; in election of
1800, 288-290; princioles, 288, 291-292;
dissensions in. 300-303.
Republican party, the second, origin, 494 ;
Seward joins, 494; in Massachusetts,
495 ; Fremont nominated, 495 ; gain in
1858, 502; successful in 1860, 508; in
the civil war, 581 ; in 1862, 582 ; moder-
ate party of Johnson, 604 ; organized in
the South, 621—622 ; loses the South,
630-633 ; in Georgia, 631 ; in North
Carolina, 631 ; in Virginia, Tennessee,
and Texas, 632 ; in Alabama, Arkan-
sas, and Mississippi, 632 ; loses the
South, in South Carolina, Florida, and
Louisiana, 633 ; repressive policy under
Grant, 633-634; situation of, after the
war, 640; in the elections of 1866, 640.
Resaca de la Palma, battle of, 447.
Resumption of specie payment, act for, 669 ;
achievement of, 699.
Revere, Paul, 180.
Revolution, colonial assemblies and parties,
loo, 101 ; causes of, 161 ; principles under-
lying, 161 ; Bute's policy, 161; King's
veto and, 162 ; navigation acts and, 163 ;
Grenville's policy, 162-164; growing
irritation, 160-170; Townshend Acts,
- 160-170; causes summarized, 173; atti-
tude of three groups, 174; first continental
congress, 1 78 ; declaration of independence,
186-188; indifference of people, 192;
army of the patriots, 193 ; French alliance,
198; compromise offered, 199; war ended,
213 ; treaty of peace, 214-216.
Reynolds, General, at Gettysburg, 560;
death of, 560.
Rhode Island, founded, 66, 68 ; charter, 68 ;
settled, 68; and New England confedera-
tion, 71; new charter, 80; and the Do-
minion of New England, 94 ; and the revo-
lution of 1688, 97 ; religious freedom in,
151 ; and paper money, 158; paper-money
commotions, 236; "Know Ye" men, 236;
ratifies the constitution, 249; constitu-
tional reform in, 474-476.
Riall, General, death of, 325.
Ribaut, explores Florida, in.
Rice, a staple crop, 8; trade in, 142, 143.
Richmond, capitol of confederacy, 519;
advance on, 519; captured, 566.
Right of deposit, at New Orleans, 297.
Rivers, as means of transportation, 3. See
Transportation .
Roads, colonial, 134. See Internal Improve-
ments.
Roanoke Island, settlement on, 42 ; signifi-
cance of, 43 ; taken by Burnside, 570.
Robertson, James, settles in Tennessee, 234.
Robinson, Dr. Charles, in Kansas, 489.
Robinson, Rev. John, at Scrooby, 59; at
Leyden, 59, 60.
Rochambeau, against Cornwallis, 212.
Rockefeller, John D., and the organization
of the oil trust, 736-739 ; group of banks,
740.
Rockingham, ministry of, 169, 214.
Rocky Mountains, influence of, i.
Rodgers, Captain John, 317, 327.
Roman Catholics, early settlers in Mary-
land, 54 ; Jesuits in Maryland, 55 ; treat-
ment of, 152, 354.
Roosevelt, Theodore, as civil service com-
missioner, 710; in campaign of 1884, 718;
and Rough Riders, 795 ; and the Panama
revolution, 819; elected vice-president,
827; and McKinley, 829; first message,
829; his policy on trusts, 830; appeals
to the people, 830; and the coal strike,
830 ; control of corporations, 83 1 ; elected
president,. 832; relations with the senate,
833 ; public opinion for, 834 ; return from
Africa, 840; in New York politics, 840;
becomes candidate in 1912, 843-844;
at Chicago convention, 845 ; nominated
by the progressive party, 847 ; shot by
fanatic, 848 ; defeated, 848.
Rose, George, mission to America, 315,
335-
Rosecrans, General, at battle of Stone's
river, 530; campaign around Chatta-
nooga, 532-534 ; at battle of Chickamauga,
533; removed from command, 534.
Ross, General, attacks Washington, 329;
attacks Baltimore, 330.
Rough Riders, 795 ; at Santiago, 796, 798.
"Round Robin," at Santiago, 803.
Rule of war of 1756, 307.
Rum, manufacture of, 141.
"Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion," 719.
Rush, Richard, supported for vice-president,
390.
Russell, Jonathan, commissioner at Ghent,
334-
Russia, efforts of Czar to make peace, 333-
INDEX
334; and the Monroe Doctrine, 375;
sells Alaska, 643.
Ryswick, treaty of, 117.
Sabine Cross Roads, 542.
Sacs and Foxes, driven westward, 465.
Sagasta, offers reform in Cuba, 787; yields
on armistice, 789.
St. Augustine, founded, in.
St. Clair, defeat of, 262 ; governor of Ohio,
342.
St. Lawrence river, as a menas of trans-
portation, 2 ; explored by Cartier, 36.
St. Leger, General, 193; defeated, 196.
St. Louis, founded, 115; desires transcon-
tinental railroad, 68 1.
St. Louis strike, 1886, 742.
St. Marks, attacked by Jackson, 369.
St. Mary's, Maryland, settled, 54.
Salary Grab act, 650.
Salem, settled, 63 ; witchcraft trials, 149.
Salisbury, Lord, on Venezuela, 779.
Samoa, value of, 765 ; conflicting interests
in, 765 ; storm in, 766 ; divided, 766.
Sampson, W. T., on north shore of Cuba,
793 ; at battle of Santiago, 80 1 ; and con-
troversy with Schley, 804.
Sanborn Contracts, the, 651.
Sandys, Sir Edwin, and Virginia, 50, 51.
San Jacinto, battle of, 421.
San Juan Hill, 796, 797 ; carried, 798.
Santa Anna, opposed to Texas, 421.
Santiago, Cervera at, 793 ; blockaded, 794,
795 ; army at, 796-799 ; defenses of, 796 ;
battle of, 797 ; surrender of, 799.
Santo Domingo, Napoleon's attempt to
conquer, 298 ; annexation of, 645 ; treaty
for annexation, 671; and foreign debts,
827.
Saratoga, surrender at, 197 ; convention at,
repudiated, 197.
Savage's Station, battle of, 549.
Savannah, taken by British, 207 ; taken from
the British, 211; entered by Sherman,
539-
Saybrook, settled, 69.
Saybrook platform, 153.
Scalawags, 621.
Schenectady, taken by French, 116.
Schley, W. S., on south shore of Cuba, 793,
794 ; at battle of Santiago, 801 ; contro-
versy, 804.
Schofield, General, at battle of Franklin,
538; reenforces Sherman at Goldsboro,
541 ; secretary of war, 616.
Schomburgk line, 777.
Schools, public, growth of, 476-478 ; in New
England, 476; work of Horace Mann
477 ; in Middle States, 477 ; in the South,
477 ; in the West, 478.
Schurman, President, in the Philippines,
810.
Schurz, Carl, liberal attitude toward South,
633 ; an independent, 693 ; and civil
service reform, 707; in campaign of 1884,
718; as leader, 723.
Schuyler, Fort, siege of, 196.
Schuyler, General, against Burgoyne, 196.
Scioto Company, 342.
Scituate, 62.
Scotch-Irish, settled in the colonies, 147.
Scott, Thomas A., as a railroad builder,
733-
Scott, Winfield, at Chippewa, 325; at Lun-
dy's Lane, 325; Mexican campaign, 448-
450; nominated for presidency, 485.
Scrooby, 59.
Seabury, Rev. Samuel, made bishop, 353.
Secession, suggested in 1798, 285; threatened
in 1849, 453 ; Nashville convention, 457 ;
Davis resolutions, 1860, 505; Yancey's
Charleston speech, 506 ; South Carolina
acts, 511 ; other states, 511, 517.
Sedgwick, General, at Chancellorsville,
557, 558.
Sedition Law, passed, 284; execution of,
284; Jefferson's way of meeting, 285.
Seminary Ridge, 560.
Seminole war, 368-369; under Jackson,
467-468.
Senate, opposed to Roosevelt, 833; popular
disapproval of, 834.
Senators, popular election of, 851.
Serapis, 205.
Servants, indented, demand for, 137; kid-
napping, 137; voluntary servants, 138;
convicts, 138; vagabonds, 138; condition
of, 138.
Seven Pines, battle of, 548.
Seven years' war, 124-130.
Sevier, John, 234.
Seward, W. H., .Northern leader, 488;
joins the republicans, 494; and republi-
can nomination, 495, 507 ; Lamar on, 507 ;
not nominated, 508; and peace with the
South, 514; and the confederate agents,
515; Lincoln overrules, 516; wounded,
568, 600 ; and reconstruction, 600 ; forces
French out of Mexico, 643 ; and purchase
of Alaska, 643.
Sewing machine, invented, 465.
Seymour, Horatio, nominated, 1868, 642.
Shatter, General, at Santiago, 796 ; his plan
of battle, 797 ; as a commander, 804.
INDEX
879
Shannon, the, 327.
Shaw, Robert G., killed, 570, 573.
Shays's rebellion, 236.
Shelburne, ministry of, 214.
Shenandoah valley, Jackson in, 547 ; Early
in, 565 ; Sheridan in, 565.
Sheridan, General, in the valley campaign,
565-566 ; as military governor, 623 ;
and the Indians, 686, 687.
Sherman, J. S., nominated for vice-president,
835-
Sherman, John, as financier, 662 ; secretary
of the treasury, 694 ; on Hayes's Southern
policy, 695 ; achieves resumption, 699 ;
candidate for nomination, 1884, 716; as
leader, 723.
Sherman, Roger, 187.
Sherman, W. T., first move against Vicks-
burg, 530 ; at Chattanooga, 534, 535 ;
advance toward Atlanta, 535-539; takes
Atlanta, 537 ; march to the sea, 538, 539 ;
march on Savannah, .539; devastation
unnecessary, 539-540; in the Carolinas,
540; halt at Goldsboro, 541 ; comes to aid
of Grant, 548 ; receives Johnston's sur-
render, 568.
Sherman anti-trust law, 740.
Sherman silver law, passed, 747; in opera-
tion, 754 ; repealed, 755 ; the West aroused,
755-
Shiloh, battle of, 528.
Shipping, condition of, 1783-1815, 347.
Shirley, Governor, and Louisburg, 120;
expedition against Fort Niagara, 124; and
removal of Acadians, 124.
Siboney, landing at, 796.
Sigsbee, Captain, on Maine disaster, 788.
Silver, deposits of, 1 1 ; free, origin of move-
ment, 698 ; the Bland-Allison bill, 699 ; use
of small silver notes, 746 ; silver forced out,
746 ; silver sentiment, 747 ; Sherman silver
law, 747, 754; Cleveland on, 750; maintain-
ing parity, 754, 755~757 ; Sherman law re-
pealed, 755 ; "endless chain," the, 755-756 ;
organize in West and South, 758; control
democratic convention, 758; issue in 1896,
762.
Silver mining, 677-678.
Sinking fund, established, 260.
Sioux wars, 1866-1868, 685, 687-689; com-
mission to Sioux, 688.
Sitting Bull, in the Sioux war, 687-689.
Slater, Samuel, and cotton mills, 349.
Slaughter-house cases, 636.
Slavery, Indian, 30 ; in first Northwestern
ordinance, 232; in second ordinance, 233;
excluded from the Northwest, 344 ; relation
to cotton, 346 ; abolished in the North, 350 ;
emancipation in the South, 351 ; method
of abolishing, 350; early congressional
position, 351; first fugitive slave law,
351; restricted in the West, 351; revived
importations, 352; law of 1807, 352;
smuggling, 352; and the West, 371;
fixed in South, 428 ; effect of agitation on
South, 430; revised black code, 430;
new fugitive slave law, 455, 457 ; as a
Southern institution, 468-470; disappear-
ance in the North, 469 ; numbers of
slaves, 470; treatment of slaves, 470;
growth of pro-slavery, 471 ; divides the
churches, 471-472; fugitive slaves not
returned, 486 ; the Kansas-Nebraska act,
486-488; new leaders, 488; attitude of
pro-slavery men, 493, 505, 506.
Slaves, in the Carolinas, 108 ; excluded from
Georgia, no; condition in colonies, 138—
140; introduced, 138; Spanish type of
slavery, 139; colonial slave code, 139;
trade in, 144; carried away by British,
216; three fifths in apportionment, 246;
importation before 1808, 246; fugitives,
as "contrabands," 577. See Slavery.
Slave-trade, 144 ; beginning of, 41.
"Sleepy Hollow," 202.
Slidell, Mexican mission, 446; seized on the
Trent, 522.
Sloat, Commodore, in California, 449.
Sloughter, Henry, governor of New York,
103.
Smith, Captain John, sails for Virginia,
46 ; services, 48 ; relations with the Indians,
48, 52.
Smith, Kirby, at Bull Run, 520; in Arkansas,
542 ; surrenders, 569.
Smith, Robert, secretary of navy, 292.
Smuggling, 144.
Smythe, General, 323.
"Snap Convention," in New York, 750.
Social classes, 135, 136-137.
Social conditions, in Virginia, 49.
Soils, character of, 6; in New England, 6;
in the South, 7 ; in the West, 7.
Somers, Lieutenant, at Tripoli, 296.
Sons of Liberty, formed, 166; decline, 169.
Soto, Hernando de, 38.
South, the, county in, 135; life in, 137;
trade in, 142; religion, 151; her interests
in the constitutional convention, 246;
retains slavery, 350-351 ; social classes in,
468; slaveholders in 1860, 469; non-
slaveholders, 469 ; growth of pro-slavery,
471; see Slavery; public schools in,
477; position on Kansas, 1856, 493;
88o
INDEX
effect of John Brown on, 504 ; attitude on
reconstruction, 1865, 601, 619; accepts
emancipation, 601, 619; economic ruin,
619; social reversal, 620; in despair,
620; parties forming, 620-621; "Con-
servative" party, 621; a republican
party forms, 621, 622; congressional
reconstruction in operation, 622-625;
was it lawless? 623 ; registration of voters,
623 ; military governors, 623 ; registration
under reconstruction acts, 623 ; constitu-
tional conventions, 624; constitutions
ratified, 624; why radical reconstruction
failed, 626; Ku Klux Klan, 627-630.
South American states, recognition of, 367,
374-
Southampton, Earl of, and Virginia, 51.
South Carolina, misrule in, 106 ; Indian war,
107 ; overthrow of proprietors, 108 ;
beats off attack by Spain, 119; trade, 142,
143; religion in, 151 ; and stamp act, 168;
attack of British at Charleston, 183;
overrun by British, 207; aid given at
King's Mountain, 208; ratifies the con-
stitution, 248; and nullification, 387,
396, 399 ; not supported by Georgia, 400 ;
federal operations in, 570; readmitted,
624 ; republicans overthrown, 633 ; dis-
puted returns in 1876, 655, 657; surrend-
ered to democrats, 657.
South Dakota, a state, 748.
Southern rams, 569.
South Improvement Co., 736.
Southwest, the, growth of, 341, 344.
Spain, explorations of, in the interior, 37-39;
as a colonizing nation, 39 ; in the seven
years' war, 128; aids the American revolu-
tion, 198, 199 ; refuses aid to America, 214 ;
and treaty of 1783, 214; intrigues in
Southwest, 263 ; secret boundary clause,
215, 264; and Southern Indians, 265;
treaty of 1795, 265; and the purchase of
Louisiana, 299, 300; and Burr, 304; and
war of 1812, 321, 331; negotiations for
Florida, 368; protests against Jackson,
369; and American neutrality, in Cuba,
782, 785 ; the Virginius, 783 ; and neg-
lected Cuban reforms, 784; Cleveland's
attitude, 785, 786 ; Sagasta's reforms, 787 ;
the Maine, 787, 788; Cuban armistice
demanded, 789; war declared on, 789;
peace with, 805-806 ; and Cuban debt, 805.
Spanish war, 782-807.
Speaker, power under Reed, 724; power
reduced, 838; election of 1859, 504.
Specie circular, issued, 425; and panic of
1837, 432.
Sphericity of the earth, belief in, 26.
Spoils system, 393.
Spottsylvania, battle of, 563.
Spring, Dr. Gardiner, 412.
Springfield, settled, 69.
Squanto, 61.
Squatter sovereignty. See Popular Sover-
eignty.
"Stalwarts," 695.
Stamp act, proposed, 164; passed, 166;
effects in America, 166; Patrick Henry's
resolutions, 166; congress at New York,
167; repealed, 168; effect of repeal, 168.
Stanbery, Henry, opinion of, on Johnson's
powers, 612 ; defends Johnson, 615.
Standard Oil Company, history of, 736-739 ;
fined by courts, 836 ; suit to dissolve, 840,
842.
Standish, Miles, 61.
Stanton, in Johnson's cabinet, 601 ; favors
the radicals, 60 1 ; and tenure-of -office act,
611; suspended, 614; removed, 614;
resigns, 617.
Stanwix, Fort. See Fort Schuyler.
Star of the West, 512.
Star route frauds, 704.
Stark, John, battle of Bennington, 195.
State governments; formed by advice of
congress, 187, 235; varying features, 217;
suffrage, 217; sovereignty in, 218; two
schools of citizens, 219; powers under the
articles, 239; reform of, 472-476.
State rights, and nullification, 387-388;
in 1828, 389 ; party formed, 396.
States, sovereignty of, 218; loyalty to, 230;
large and small, controversy between,
243-245 ; limited by constitution, 253 ;
authority limited by Marshall, 358-360;
Southern, status of in reconstruction,
595; reconstructed under Johnson, 600,
601.
State universities, development of, 479.
Steamboats on the interior rivers, 464;
cross the Atlantic, 464.
Stephens, A. H., confederate vice-president,
Stephens, U. S., found = Knights of Labor,
741-
Steuben, Baron von, his Services, 198.
Stevens, Thaddeus, leader of radicals, 604;
power in congress, 604, 607, 608; prose-
cutes Johnson, 615 ; death of, 625.
Stewart, A. T., nominated secretary of the
treasury, 644.
Stillwater. See Freeman's Farm.
Stimson, H. L., candidate for governorship,
840.
INDEX
881
Stone's river, battle of, 530.
Stonewall, the confederate ram, 589.
Stony Point, 201.
Strasburg, Va., Jackson at, 547.
Strong, Caleb, at Hartford convention, 336.
Strong, William, appointment as judge, 664.
Stuart, J. E. B., at capture of John Brown,
503 ; as cavalry leader, 559.
Stuyvesant, Peter, as governor, 74 ; religious
persecutions, 74; takes Swedish settle-
ments, 75 ; loses New Amsterdam, 75.
Suffrage, in early state governments, 217,
228 ; grows liberal, 472-474 ; negro, in four-
teenth amendment, 607 ; in the reconstruc-
tion acts, 609-611 ; Lincoln on, 597, 622;
Johnson, 622; in Southern constitutions,
624.
Sugar, and Wilson-Gorman bill, 728.
Sullivan, General, at Newport, 201.
Sumner, Charles, speech on Kansas, 490;
attacked by Brooks, 490 ; a radical, 605 ;
and fourteenth amendment, 607, 608 ; and
civil rights act, 1875, 634; death of, 1874,
635 ; Lamar on, 635 ; Grant's quarrel with,
645 ; states case against England, 671 ; and
civil service reform, 707.
Sumner, General, at Fredericksburg, 556.
Sumter, Fort, relief of, 512, 515; attacked,
516.
Sumter, partisan leader, 207 ; under Greene,
210.
Supreme Court, the, functions of, 252, 357-
360; in reconstruction days, 611; inter-
prets war amendments, 635-638.
Surplus, the, 714; lowered by hard times,
715; revived, 715; removed through
expenditure, 725.
Surplus revenue, distribution, 424; effects
of distribution, 432.
Sutro tunnel, 677.
Sweden, settlements in America, 75.
Swiss, settlers, 146, 147.
Symmes, land grant of, 342.
Syracuse, convention at 1855, 495-
Taft, W. H., in the Philippines, 811, 812;
restoring order in Cuba, 807 ; nominated
for presidency, 835; elected, 836; admin-
istration of, 837-843 ; and Payne-Aldrich
tariff, 837; Ballinger, 838; and Canadian
reciprocity, 841 ; candidate for renom-
ination, 843-844; republican nominee,
845 ; elected, 848 ; legislation under, 849-
850.
Talleyrand, and American claims, 280;
accepts treaty, 282; and Louisiana, 297-
299 ; and Florida, 302.
Tammany, and Tilden, 653, 702 ; and Cleve-
land, 716, 720.
Taney, R. B., secretary of the treasury, 414;
removes deposits, 414; Chief Justice, 415;
decision in Dred Scott case, 498.
Tanner, "Corporal," and pensions, 726, 749.
Tariff, bill of 1816, 364; growing demand
for, 384-386 ; bill of 1820, 385 ; bill of 1824,
385 ; bill of 1828, 386 ; a sectional question,
384-385; South Carolina and, 387-388;
Verplanck bill, 409; compromise bill,
1833, 410; of 1842, 436; campaign issue,
1844, 443 ; of 1846, 445 ; Morrill act, 483 ;
in McCulloch's time, 661 ; Wool and
Woolens act, 661, 713; tariff of 1870, 663,
713 ; two methods of reform, 712 ; tariff of
1872, 713; tariff of 1875, 713; commission
of 1882, 714; tariff of 1883, 715; Morri-
son bill, 715 ; reform under Cleveland, 721 ;
Mills bill, 721; issue in 1888, 721-722;
McKinley bill, 724-726; Wilson bill,
728; Wilson-Gorman bill, 729; Dingley
bill, 729; the McKinley and Sherman
silver law, 747; an issue in 1896, 762;
with Philippines, 812; and the depend-
encies, 813, 814; McKinley's later policy
on, 829 ; Payne-Aldrich, 837 ; Canadian
reciprocity, 841 ; democratic bills of 1911,
841 ; democratic bills of 1912, 842.
Tarleton, in the South, 207; at Cowpens,
208; in Virginia, 211.
Taxation, power of congress over, 359.
Taxes, external and internal, 165, 170.
Taylor, " Dick," commands in Arkansas, 542 ;
surrenders, 569.
Taylor, Zachary, campaign on the Rio
Grande, 446-448; nominated for presi-
dency, 451; elected, 452; death of, 458;
against the Seminoles, 467.
Tea, duty on, 173; sent to America, 175;
action of colonies, 175; "Tea party,"
176.
Tecumseh, his ambition, 318; slain at battle
of the Thames, 323.
Telegraph invented, 465.
Teller, Senator, and silver, 755; leaves
republican party, 761.
Temperance movement, 480.
Tennessee, settled, 232, 234; a state, 264;
reconstructed under Lincoln, 597; read-
mitted, 609; republicans overthrown, 632.
Tennessee, the, 571.
Tenure-of-office act, passed, 611; tested by
Johnson, 614.
Territories, government of, 233.
Terry, General, against the Sioux, 687.
Texas, explored by Pike, 356; early history,
882
INDEX
419; not to be purchased, 420; revolution
in, 420; annexation, 421, 438, 440, 444;
opposition of Adams, 421 ; recognition
extended, 422 ; England's alleged scheme,
438; a state in the union, 444; disputed
boundary, 446; boundaries fixed, 450;
debt assumed, 455, 457 ; readmitted, 625 ;
republicans overthrown, 632.
Texas, the, 800, 80 1, 802.
Thames, battle of, 323.
Thanksgiving Day, 62.
Thomas, General, succeeds Rosecrans, 534;
in battle of Missionary Ridge, 535 ; defense
of Nashville, 538.
Thomas, Lorenzo, secretary of war, 614.
Thornton, Colonel, at New Orleans, 333.
Thoroughfare Gap, 551, 552.
Ticonderoga, attacked unsuccessfully, 126;
taken, 127; taken by Ethan Allen, 182;
not taken by Carleton, 195; taken by
Burgoyne, 195.
Tilden, S. J., governor of New York, 651 ;
nominated for presidency, 653 ; disputed
returns, 654 ; loses the election, 657 ;
and the independents, 694 ; in the investi-
gation of the election, 696 ; not nominated
in 1880, 702.
Tillman, B. R., speech in Chicago convention,
1896, 759; and the South and West, 759,
762.
Tobacco, a staple crop, 8; in Virginia, 50;
at the restoration, 80, 81 ; decline of price,
89.
Tohopeka, battle of, 332.
Tompkins, D. D., vice-president, 367.
Tonti, 114.
Topeka constitution, 489, 490.
Tories, as a class, 174, 193; in North Caro-
lina, 182, 208; in Philadelphia, 199; at
King's Mountain, 208; compensation
to, 216, 227; why disliked, 230; hardships
of, 231 ; in New York, 231 ; compensa-
tion not made, 262.
Toscanelli, letter of, 28.
Toussaint Louverture, 298.
Towns, planted, 134; government, 156;
in New York, 156; development of, 463.
Townshend, colonial policy of, 169 ; his
acts, 169, 173; death, 171; repeal of
Townshend acts, 173.
Townships, established, 233, 342.
Trade, colonial, 142-145; state of, 1783-
1789, 226; England refuses to open, 226;
congress to have control, 246 ; England
refuses concessions, 262 ; restrictions on
neutral, 272 ; and the Jay treaty, 272 ; the
carrying, under Jefferson, 306; British
restrictions on, 306-309; condition of,
1783-1815, 346; West India, 415-417.
See Navigation Acts.
Transportation, rivers and lakes, 2.
Treason, defined, 253.
Treasurer, in New York, 104.
Treaty, with France, 198; with England,
214-216; with Spain, 1795, 265; Jay's,
272-273 ; with France, 1800, 282 ; San
Ildefonso, 297 ; Louisiana purchase, 298 ;
of Monroe and Pinckney, 310; Erskine's,
316; of Fort Jackson, 332, 368; of Ghent,
334, 368; with France, 417; Webster-
Ashburton, 437 ; Guadaloupe Hidalgo,
450; Clayton-Bulwer, 458; of Washing-
ton, 672; of Fort Laramie, 684; with
Hawaii, 772, 774; Burlingame, 774;
with Japan, 776; of Paris, 1898, 805;
Hay-Pauncefote, 817; Hay-Herran (con-
vention), 818; Hay-Bunau-Varilla, 820;
of Portsmouth, 824.
Treaty of 1783, execution delayed, 261,
272, 273.
Trent, the, affair of, 522 ; negotiations about,
523-
Trenton, battle of, 192.
Tripoli, war with, 295.
Trist, N. P., and treaty with Mexico, 450.
"Truly Loyal," the, 621.
Trumbull, Lyman, leader of moderates,
605; vote on Johnson impeachment, 617;
attitude toward South, 633.
Trusts, causes producing, 736 ; the Standard
Oil Co., 736-739; and stock speculation,
739,' opposition to, 739; anti-trust law,
740; a " money trust," 740.
Truxtun, Captain, 281.
Tryon, at New York, 188; raid in Connecti-
cut, 201.
Tunis, at war, 295, 296.
Turnbull, author of "The Crisis," 387.
Turner, Nat, 430.
Twenty-Second joint rule, 598; rescinded,
656.
Twiller, Wouter van, governor of New
Amsterdam, 73.
Tyler, John, nominated, 434 ; presidency of,
435-436; repudiated by whigs, 436; and
Texas annexation, 438-440, 444; favors
Polk, 443; presides over peace congress,
"Uncle Tom's Cabin," influence of, 496.
Underground railway, 429.
Underbill, Captain John, fights for the Dutch
in New Netherland, 73.
Underwood, Oscar, party leader in the
INDEX
883
house, 841 ; candidate for nomination,
845, 846.
Union, suggested at Albany Congress, 1 23 ;
party in favor of, 222 ; Morris and Hamil-
ton, 223; Washington on, 224, 240;
growing sentiment for, 240; Madison for,
240; cause of, in Hayne- Webster debate,
396; Jackson for, 309.
Union League, in the South, 627.
Union Pacific Railroad, and Credit Mobilier,
649.
Union party, 581, 584.
Unions, in the United States, 741-744 ;
Knights of Labor, 741 ; American Federa-
tion of Labor, 743.
United States, the, constructed, 279; takes
the Macedonian, 327, 328.
Unity, influence of territorial, i.
Upshur, and Texas, 439.
Utah, made a territory, 455, 457 ; settlement
of, 679 ; a territory, 680 ; a state, 680, 748 ;
and polygamy, 748.
Utrecht, treaty of, 1 19.
Vaca, Cabec.a de, 38, 39.
Vallandigham, C. L., violent speeches of,
582 ; arrest and trial of, 583.
Valley Forge, army at, 199.
Van Buren, Martin, and the election of
1824, 380; turns to Jackson, 382; opposi-
tion to Calhoun, 382 ; secretary of state,
392 ; influence in cabinet, 393 ; influence
, on Jackson, 394; and internal improve-
ments, 394 ; benefits by Jackson-Calhoun
split, 401, 402; minister to England, 402;
nominated vice-president, 403 ; elected,
405; on West India trade, 416; elected
president, 425; character of, 432; his
presidency, 432-435; and the Texan
question, 441; a Barnburner, 451; nomi-
nated by free soil party, 452.
Vanderbilt, Cornelius, as a railroad builder,
733 ; and cooperation, 734.
Vandreuil, governor of New France, 118;
governor of Canada, 126.
Vane, Sir Harry, in Boston, 66.
Van Rensselaer, General Stephen, 323 ; votes
for Adams, 380.
Venezuela, boundary dispute, 777-781 ; origin
of dispute, 777; Cleveland's demands
on England, 779 ; commission appointed,
780 ; adjusted, 780 ; effects, 780 ; debts to
other powers, 826 ; Germany and, 826.
Vera Cruz, taken by Scott, 449.
Vergennes, friendly to America, 198; and
the treaty of peace, 214-215.
Vermont, a state, 264.
Verrazano, Giovanni da, explorations of, 35.
Vespucci, with Hojeda, 31; his pretended
discoveries, 32.
Vicksburg, significance of, 530, 532 ; first
attempt to take, 531; second attempt,
531-532.
Vincennes, taken by Clark, 204.
Vinland, 23.
Virginia, named, 42 ; English opinion of, 44 ;
government of, 45; reforms of 1609,
49; intrigues, 49; self-government, 50;
charter annulled, 50; royal governors of,
51 ; divided, 52 ; and the restoration, 80;
Berkeley's despotism, 89 ; economic condi-
tion, 89 ; Bacon's Rebellion, 90 ; during the
last years of the Stuarts, 92 ; trade, 142 ;
religion in, 151 ; the university at Henrico,
153; William and Mary College, 154;
and paper money, 158; Patrick Henry's
resolutions, 166; revolutionary commit-
tees in, 174; declares independence, 187;
and conquest of the Northwest, 203;
Cornwallis enters, 211 ; confers with Mary-
land on trade, 241 ; plan in constitutional
convention, 243 ; ratifies the constitu-
tion, 248; parties in, 270; political leader-
ship, 270; supports Crawford, 377, 378,
379 ; waning influence, 378, 393 ; attitude
toward nullification, 410; slavery debates,
1831, 430; constitutional reform in, 474;
the university of, 479; readmitted, 625;
republicans overthrown, 632.
"Virginia, Restored," 521.
Virginia, the, 569.
Virginia City, founded, 677.
Virginia Dare, 43.
Virginia resolutions, 285-287.
Virginius, the, 783.
Vixen, the, 800.
Vizcaya, the, 800, 801.
Wade-Davis bill, 597.
Wagner, Battery, attacked, 570, 573.
Waldseemuller, Martin, 33, 36.
Walker, Robert J., bis tariff bill, 445 ; as
governor of Kansas, 492.
Walker, Sir Hovenden, 118.
Wanamaker, John, postmaster-general, 723.
War, right to declare, 585.
War of 1812, rise of spirit of resist-
ance, 318; Madison favors, 319; prep-
arations for, 319; war declared, 320;
opposed in New England, 335 ; finances
of, 336; effects of defeat, 324, 336;
lessons of, 338.
Warfare, lessons of, in battle of Santiago,
803.
884
INDEX
Washington, a territory, 463 ; a state, 748.
Washington, Fort, 188, 191.
Washington, George, journey to the Ohio,
122 ; expedition to forks of the Ohio, 122 ;
defeated, 122; with Braddock, 123;
commander-in-chief, 182 ; operations
around New York, 188-191 ; New Jersey
campaign, 191 ; Philadelphia campaign,
194; at Monmouth, 200; deceives Clinton,
212; in Yorktown campaign, 212; and
kingship, 218; on stronger government,
224; opposes army plot, 224; presides over
constitutional convention, 242 ; elected
president, 256 ; on the bank, 261 ; and
Genet, 266 ; and whisky insurrection, 268 ;
attitude toward parties, 269; reflected,
271; Farewell Address, 274; command of
new army, 281.
Washington, Lawrence, gets Ohio lands,
121.
Washington, taken by British, 329.
"Washita, battle of the," 686.
Wasp, the, takes the Frolic, 327.
Watauga, Indians attack, 203; sends aid
to King's Mountain, 208 ; settled, 234.
Watercourses. See Transportation.
Water-power, distribution of, n.
Watertown, and taxation, 64.
Waxhaw, battle of, 207.
Wayne, Anthony, at Stony Point, 201 ;
subdues the Ohio Indians, 262.
Weaver, J. B., nominated for presidency, 702,
752 ; and people's party, 752 ; vote of, 753.
Webster, Daniel, supports the tariff, 387;
debate with Hayne, 396-398; supports
Jackson on nullification, 409; opposes
annexation of Texas, 422 ; supported by
whigs, 425 ; remains in Tyler's cabinet,
436 ; and the treaty with England, 437 ;
on Missouri compromise, 457 ; death of,
488.
Webster, Peletiah, on a stronger govern-
ment, 240.
Weed, Thurlow, defeat of Clay, 434; joins
the republicans, 494.
Wells, David A., as financier, 660.
Welsh, settled in the colonies, 147.
West, Far, physical characteristics, 676;
arrival of miners, 677.
West, settlement of, 232-235; discontent
in, 264; and Burr, 304; and war of 1812,
321; at the battle of New Orleans, 333;
growth of, 341-344; New England and
Southern streams of migration, 342;
drawn to support the North, 461 ; public
schools in, 478; state universities in, 479;
and the panic of 1857, 482.
West India Company, Dutch, possession
of New Netherland, 72.
West Indies, trade with secured, 415.
West Point, Arnold at, 201 ; military acad-
emy, 320; after war of 1812, 363.
West Virginia, formed, 520; defense of, 520,
526.
Wethersfield, settled by Dutch, 69; arriral
of the English, 69.
Weyler, in Cuba, 786, 787.
Weymouth, George, aids colonization, 45.
Whale fisheries, 5, 142.
Wheat, a staple crop, 8; area of, increased,
665 ; prices, 667 ; crop of 1879, 700.
Wheeler, Joseph, at Santiago, 796, 797,
798, 799-
Wheeler, W. A., vice-president, 653.
Whig party, destroyed, 493, 495; "Con-
science" and "Cotton" whigs, 495.
Whisky, manufacture of, 267.
Whisky insurrection, 267-269.
Whisky ring, the, 651.
White, Hugh L., for president, 1836, 425.
Whitefield, Rev. George, and the "Great
Awakening," 150.
White Plains, battle of, 190.
" White slave " act, 851.
Whitney, Eli, 345.
Wilderness, battle of, 563.
Wilkes, Captain, seizes Mason and Slidell,
522.
Wilkinson, James, in Spanish employ, 264 ;
corruption of, 264, 304; relations with
Burr, 304, 305 ; expedition on the St.
Lawrence, 324.
William Henry, Fort, taken by Montcalm,
125.
Williams, Rev. John, captured by French
and Indians, 118.
Williams, Roger, driven from Massachusetts,
65 ; gets charter for Rhode Island, 68.
Willing, Thomas, 228.
Wilmington, Cornwallis in, 211 ; evacuated,
213.
Wilmot Proviso, proposed, 451 ; in nominat-
ing conventions, 451, 452 ; Clay's atti-
tude, 454.
Wilson, Henry, vice-president, 649.
Wilson, James, in constitutional convention,
242, 244, 245.
Wilson, Woodrow, candidate for nomina-
tion, 845, 846, 847; elected president,
848.
Wilson committee, the, 649.
Wilson-Gorman tariff, 728, 729; effect of,
729, 756.
Wilson's Creek, battle of, 541.
INDEX
885
Winchester, General, 323.
Winchester, taken by Jackson, 547 ; Early
defeated at, 565.
Winder, General, at Bladensburg, 329.
Windom, William, secretary of the treasury,
723 ; ideas of free silver, 747.
Windsor, Connecticut, settled, 69.
Wingfield, Edward Maria, and the Vir-
ginia colony, 46, 47, 48.
Winthrop, John, relation to Puritan migra-
tion, 63 ; elected governor, 64 ; deals with
Watertown, 64; presides over trial of
Mrs. Hutchinson, 67 ; death of, 67.
Winthrop, John, Jr., settles Saybrook, 69.
Wirt, William, attorney-general, 367 ; nom-
inated by anti-masons, 404; vote of,
405-
Wisconsin, a territory, 344 ; a state, 463 ;
Black Hawk war, 466.
Witches, punished, 149.
Wolcott, Oliver, 279, 287.
Wolfe, General, at capture of Louisburg,
125; against Quebec, 127; death, 127.
Wood, Leonard, commands Rough Riders,
795-
Worcester, Dean C., in the Philippines, 810.
Wounded, recovery of the, at Santiago, 803.
Wright, Silas, a Barnburner, 451.
Wyoming, territory, 678; state, 680, 748.
Wyoming valley, raided, 203.
X Y Z papers, 280.
Yates, notes, 243.
Yazoo claims, 301, 302
Zeno brothers, 23.
Printed in the United States of America.
'T^HE following pages contain advertisements of a few
of the Macmillan publications on kindred subjects
BY EDWARD CHANNING
Professor of History in Harvard University
History of the United States
To be completed in eight volumes Cloth, 8vo, each $2.30 by mail,
Now Ready. Volume I — The Planting of a Nation in the New World,
1000-1660. Volume II — A Century of Colonial History, 1660-1760.
Preparing. Volume III — The American Revolution, 1760-1789. Vol-
ume IV — Federalists and Republicans, 1789-1812, to follow immediately.
Volumes V-VIII to appear in rapid succession.
" Many as are the histories of the United States, Professor Channing has
ample justification in adding another to the list, not only in his new point of
view but in his exhaustive knowledge. His narrative flows on so smoothly
that it is only when one realizes the immense mass of controversies which he
settles with calm common sense, the thoroughness of his bibliography, the
sanity of his criticisms on the hundreds of authors consulted that one grasps
the fulness of his erudition. . . . From the conception of his task it follows
that the English background must be kept in view, and here Professor Chan-
ning treads with the same sureness. . . . Between the mother country and
the colonies he holds the scales fair, doing justice to Great Britain without
falling into the exaggerated imperialism of some recent American authors." — '
The American Historical Review.
" This work will show the development of the people from institutional,
industrial, and social, as well as from political and military, points of view.
Its facts are largely based upon original records, and its form and arrange-
ment will commend themselves highly for their practical value and helpful-
ness." — Boston Transcript.
"In style the work is dignified, yet simple and unpretentious, the narra-
tive running smoothly in readable fashion. . . . From the earliest known
records of the arrivals of white men upon the shores of the Western Conti-
nent until the dawning of a national consciousness among the colonies about
1660, the story proceeds, giving a lucid account of the inevitable and logical
course of racial evolution. Among the throng of histories this will undoubt-
edly take a high place as one worthy of distinguished consideration." — Phila-
delphia Evening Telegraph.
\
PUBLISHED BY
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York
" IT IS NOT PROBABLE THA T WE SHALL SEE A MORE
COMPLETE OR BETTER BALANCED HISTORY OF OUR
GREAT CIVIL WAR." —The Nation.
History of the United States
From the Compromise of 1850 to the Final Restoratior
of Home Rule at the South in 1877.
By JAMES FORD RHODES, LL.D., Litt.D.
Complete in seven octavo volumes, attractively bouna
in dark blue cloth.
I.
1850-1854
ii.
1854-1860
in.
1860-1862
IV.
1862-1864
V.
1864-1866
VI.
1866-1872
VII.
1872-1877
The first volume tells the history of the country during the four years'
futile attempt to avoid conflict by the Missouri Compromise, ending with
its repeal in 1854.
The second volume deals with the stirring events which followed this re-
peal, through all the Kansas and Nebraska struggles, to the triumph of the
then newly organized Republican party in the election of Lincoln in 1860.
The third volume states the immediate effect upon the country of Lincoln's
election ; covers the period of actual secession ; the dramatic opening of
the war, the almost light-hearted acceptance of it as a " three-months' pic-
nic " ; and closes in the sobering defeat of Bull Run.
The fourth volume follows the progress of the war in vivid discussions of
campaigns, battles, the patient search for the right commander, and the
attitude toward this country of the British government and people.
The fifth volume opens with the account of Sherman's march to the sea.
The adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment, Lincoln's assassination, John-
son's administration, and the state of society in the North and South at the
end of the exhausting war are fully treated. The volume ends with an
account of the political campaign of 1866.
The sixth volume considers the enactment of the Reconstruction Acts and
their execution ; the impeachment of President Johnson, the rise of the
Ku Klux Klan, the operation of the Freedman's Bureau, the ratification
of the XlVth and the passage of the XVth Amendment, are among other
topics in the volume.
The seventh volume begins with an account of the Credit Mobilier
scandal, the " Salary Grab " Act, and describes the financial panic of
1873. The account of Reconstruction is continued with a careful summing
up, and the work ends with an account of the presidential campaign of
1876 and the disputed Presidency.
The set in cloth, $17.50; half calf or morocco, $32;
three-quarters levant, $40.
PUBLISHED BY
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York
BY HERBERT L. OSGOOD, PH.D.
Professor of History in Columbia University
The American Colonies in the Seventeenth
Century
Three volumes, cloth, gilt top, 8vo, each $3.00
"Professor Osgood^s work differs from all other comprehensive stud-
ies of American Colonial history in its consistent interpretation of that
history from the point of view and in the terms of public law. This
has not involved any neglect of social and economic material, or of the
personal element which lends to our colonial annals so much of charm ;
but such material has been used as illustrating political growth, rather
than for its own sake. The style is readable and effective, and the
wealth of incident is great. . . .
" Outside of the writers of a few special works, no historian has yet
thought it worth while to tell us much about the way in which the pri-
vate ownership of land was established and developed in New England,
how taxes were levied and collected, the objects of colonial and local
expenditure, the legal regulation of industry and trade, the organization,
equipment, and employment of the military forces of the colonies, or
the method of governmental dealings with the Indians. Thanks to
Professor Osgood^ researches, however, we have at last a clear and
orderly outline of the governmental and administrative life of the peo-
ple in these respects. . . . Altogether, the book must be adjudged the
most substantial and masterful contribution made to the study of Ameri-
can colonial history in recent years" — The Nation, New York.
"The evidence, which with but a single exception is drawn from
printed sources, is weighed with consistent impartiality, each charter,
concession, and legislative act being dissected with great minuteness of
detail ; and the material compared and distributed with logical exact-
ness until the whole takes on an orderly form, and we see for the first
time what was the institutional organization of the colonies in the sev-
enteenth century. . . ." — Professor CHARLES M. ANDREWS, in The
American Historical Review.
"We are taken straight to the roots of the original colonies and
made to see how they began to grow. ... If only for the interpre-
tation of the Puritan, the book would be invaluable. The story of
Massachusetts has never been told in a more comprehensive, just, and
sympathetic way." — Congregationalist*
PUBLISHED BY
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
84-66 Fifth Avenue, New Tork
A GREAT WORK INCREASED IN VALUE
The American Commonwealth
BY JAMES BRYCE
New edition, thoroughly revised, with four new chapters
Two 8vo volumes, $4.00
" More emphatically than ever is it the most noteworthy
treatise on our political and social system." — The Dial.
"The most sane and illuminating book that has been
written on this country." - — Chicago Tribune.
" What makes it extremely interesting is that it gives the
matured views of Mr. Bryce after a closer study of Ameri-
can institutions for nearly the life of a generation." — San
Francisco Chronicle.
" The work is practically new and more indispensable
than ever." — Boston Herald.
" In its revised form, Mr. Bryce's noble and discerning
book deserves to hold its preeminent place for at least
twenty years more." — Record-Herald, Chicago, 111.
" Mr. Bryce could scarcely have conferred on the Amer-
ican people a greater benefit than he has done in prepar-
ing the revised edition of his monumental and classic work,
'The American Commonwealth.' " — Boston Globe.
" If the writer of this review was to be compelled to re-
duce his library of Americana to five books, James
Bryce's 'American Commonwealth' would be one of them."
— Evening Telegram, Portland, Ore.
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
Publishers 64-66 Fifth Avenue New York
By CHARLES A. BEARD
Professor of History in Columbia University, author of " Introduction to the
English Historians "
Readings in American Government and Politics
A collection of interesting material illustrative of the different
periods in the History of the United States, prepared for those
students who desire to study source writings.
Cloth, crown 8vo. Now ready, $1.90
" An invaluable guide for the student of politics, setting forth in an
illuminating way the many phases of our political life." — Critic.
American Government and Politics
Cloth, 776 pages, \2nto, index, $2.10
A work designed primarily for college students, but of considerable
interest to the general reader. A special feature is the full attention
paid to topics that have been forced into public attention by the
political conditions of the present time.
Documents on the State-wide
Initiative, Referendum, and Recall
By CHARLES A. BEARD
Associate Professor of Politics in Columbia University
AND
BIRL E. SHULTZ
Indiana Scholar in Politic?! Science in Columbia University
Cloth, \2tno, 394//., 52.00
This volume includes all of the constitutional amendments providing
for a state-wide system of initiative and referendum now in force,
several of the most significant statutes elaborating the constitutional
provisions, all of the constitutional amendments now pending adoption,
six important judicial decisions, and certain materials relative to the
state-wide recall. While no attempt has been made to go into the
subject of the initiative, referendum, and recall as applied to local
and municipal government, some illustrative papers showing the system
in ordinary municipalities and commission-governed cities have been
included.
PUBLISHED BY
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
64-66 Fifth Avenue, New York
E Bassett, John Sp«ncer
178 A short history of the
B32 United States
1917
PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET
UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
LIBRARY
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11