A constant, close observer of what was done by Virginia, he held in mind that on the twenty-fourth day of December 1779, on occasion of some unwise proceedings of congress, she had resolved "that the legislature of this commonwealth are greatly alarmed at the assumption of power lately exercised by congress. While the right of recommending measures to each state by congress is admitted, we contend for that of judging of their utility and expediency, and of course either to approve or reject. Making any state answerable for not agreeing to any of its recommendations would establish a dangerous precedent against the authority of the legislature and the sovereignty of the separate states." * This interposition of the Virginia legislature so haunted Washington's mind that he felt himself more particularly impelled to address with freedom men of whose abilities and judgments he wished to avail himself. He thoroughly understood the obstinacy and strength of opinion which he must encounter and overcome. His native state, reaching to the Mississippi and dividing the South from the North, held, from its geographical place, its numbers, and the influence of its statesmen, a power of obstructing union such as belonged to no other state. He must persuade it to renounce some share of its individual sovereignty and forego "the liberty to reject or alter any act of congress which in a full representation of states has been solemnly debated and decided on," + or there is no hope of consolidating the union. His position was one of extreme delicacy; for he was at the head of the army which could alone be employed to enforce the requisitions of congress. He therefore selected, as the Virginians to whom he could safely address himself, the three great civilians whom that commonwealth had appointed to codify its laws and adapt them to the new state of society consequent on independence, Jefferson, its governor, Pendleton, the president of its court of appeals, and Wythe, its spotless chancellor. + * Journal of House of Delegates of Virginia, for 24 December 1779, 108. Washington to James Duane, 26 December 1780. Washington to Jefferson, Pendleton, and Wythe, Madison Papers, 83, Gilpin's edition. The date of the letter is not given. It was written soon after the accession of Maryland to the confederation; probably in February, before the middle of the month, which was the time fixed for his departure from New Windsor "The alliance of the states," he said, "is now complete. If the powers granted to the respective body of the states are inadequate, the defects should be considered and remedied. Danger may spring from delay; good will result from a timely application of a remedy. The present temper of the states is friendly to the establishment of a lasting union; the moment should be improved; if suffered to pass away it may never return, and, after gloriously and successfully contending against the usurpations of Britain, we may fall a prey to our own follies and disputes." He argued for the power of compelling the states to comply with the requisitions for men and money agreeably to their respective quotas; adding: “It would give me concern should it be thought of me that I am desirous of enlarging the powers of congress unnecessarily; I declare to God, my only aim is the general good." And he promised to make his views known to others besides the three. His stepson, John Parke Custis, who was just entering into public life, he thus instructed: "The fear of giving sufficient powers to congress is futile. Under its present constitution, each assembly will be annihilated, and we must once more return to the government of Great Britain, and be made to kiss the rod preparing for our correction. A nominal head, which at present is but another name for congress, will no longer do. That honorable body, after hearing the interests and views of the several states fairly discussed and explained by their respective representatives, must dictate, and not merely recommend." * To another Virginian, Joseph Jones of King George county, whom he regarded with sincere affection and perfect trust, he wrote: "Without a controlling power in congress it will be impossible to carry on the war; and we shall speedily be for Newport. The dates of the letters of 1781, informing him of the accession of Maryland, were, from Duane, 29 January, MS.; from Sullivan, 29 January, MS.; from Matthews, 30 January. Letters to Washington, iii., 218. Washington's answer to Sullivan is 4 February, Sparks, vii., 402; to Matthews, 14 February. "The confederation being now closed will, I trust, enable congress to speak decisively in their requisitions," etc. MS. On the evening of the fourteenth, Washington was preparing to leave for Newport; an unexpected letter from Rochambeau detained him in camp till the second of March. Sparks, vii., 446, note. * Washington to John Parke Custis, 28 February 1781. Sparks, vii., 440–444. thirteen distinct states, each pursuing its local interests, till they are annihilated in a general crash. The fable of the bunch of sticks may well be applied to us.' "* In a like strain he addressed other trusty correspondents and friends. † His wants as commander-in-chief did not confine his attention to the progress of the war; he aimed at nothing less than an enduring government for all times of war and peace. As soon as the new form of union was proclaimed, congress saw its want of real authority, and sought a way to remedy the defect. A report by Madison, from a committee,‡ was completed on the twelfth and read in congress on the sixteenth of March; and this was its reasoning: "The articles of confederation, which declare that every state shall abide by the determinations of congress, imply a general power vested in congress to enforce them and carry them into effect. The United States in congress assembled, being desirous as far as possible to cement and invigorate the federal union, recommend to the legislature of every state to give authority to employ the force of the United States as well by sea as by land to compel the states to fulfil their federal engagements." # Madison enclosed to Jefferson a copy of his report, and, on account of the delicacy and importance of the subject, expressed a wish for his judgment on it before it should undergo the final decision of congress. No direct reply. from him is preserved, but Joseph Jones, who, after a visit to Richmond, *Washington to Joseph Jones, 24 March 1781. MS. Compare his letters to R. R. Livingston of New York, 31 January 1781Sparks, vii., 391; to John Sullivan of New Hampshire, 4 February 1781-Sparks, vii., 401, 402; to John Matthews of South Carolina, 14 February 1781, MS.; to James Duane of New York, 19 February 1781, MS.; to Philip Schuyler of New York, 20 February 1781, MS.; to John Parke Custis of Virginia, 28 February 1781—Sparks, vii., 442; to William Gordon, in Massachusetts, 9 March 1781— Sparks, vii, 448; to Joseph Jones of King George, Virginia, 24 March 1781, MS.; to John Armstrong of Pennsylvania, 26 March 1781-Sparks, vii., 403. Reports of committees on increasing the powers of congress, p. 19. MS. #Madison Papers, Gilpin's edition, 88-90. Reports of committees, 20, 22. MS. Madison was a member of the committee to which were referred the papers from the Hartford convention of November 1780. That committee, on the sixteenth of February 1781, made a report, which was referred back to it. Whether Madison's report of the twelfth of March proceeded from that committee, the im perfect record does not show. None of the letters of Jefferson to Madison of this year have been preserved. was again in Philadelphia about the middle of May, gave to Madison a copy of the letter of Washington to Jefferson and his two associates.* There were no chances that the proposal of Madison would be approved by any one state, yet on the second of May it was referred to a grand committee; that is, to a committee of one from each state.† On the eighteenth the Chevalier de la Luzerne, then the French minister in America, sent this dispatch to Vergennes: "There is a feeling to reform the constitution of congress; but the articles of confederation, defective as they are, cost a year and a half of labor and of debates; a change will not encounter less difficulty, and it appears to me there is more room for desire than for hope." + Even while he was writing, the movement for reform received a new impulse. In a pamphlet dated the twenty-fourth, and dedicated to the congress of the United States of America and to the assembly of the state of Pennsylvania, William Barton # insisted that congress should "not be left with the mere shadow of sovereign authority, without the right of exacting obedience to their ordinances, and destitute of the means of executing their resolves." To remedy this evil he did not look to congress itself, but "indicated the necessity of their calling a continental convention, for the express purpose of ascertaining, defining, enlarging, and limiting the duties and powers of their constitution." This is the third time that the suggestion of a general constituent convention was brought before the country by the press of Philadelphia. *Madison Papers, Gilpin's edition, 81. Reports of committees on increasing the powers of congress, 22. MS. #Not by Pelatiah Webster, as stated by Madison. Madison Papers, Gilpin's edition, 706; Elliot's stereotyped reprint, 117. First: at a later period, Webster collected his pamphlets in a volume, and this one is not among them; a disclaimer which, under the circumstances, is conclusive. The style of this pamphlet of 1781 is totally unlike the style of Pelatiah Webster. Through my friend F. D. Stone of Philadelphia I have seen the bill for printing the pamphlet; it was made out against William Barton and paid by him. Further: Barton from time to time wrote pamphlets, of which, on a careful comparison, the style, language, and forms of expression are found to correspond to this pamphlet published in 1781. Without doubt it was written by William Barton. Observations on the Nature and Use of Paper Credit, etc., Philadelphia, 1781, 37. The preface of the pamphlet is dated 24 May 1781. The grand committee of thirteen delayed their report till the twentieth of July, and then only expressed a wish to give congress power in time of war to lay an embargo at least for sixty days, and to appoint receivers of the money of the United States as soon as collected by state officers. By their advice the business was then referred to a committee of three.* Day seemed to break when, on the twentieth of July, Edmund Randolph, who had just brought from Virginia the news of its disposition to strengthen the general government, Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut, and James M. Varnum of Rhode Island, three of the ablest lawyers in their states, were selected to "prepare an exposition of the confederation, to devise a plan for its complete execution, and to present supplemental articles." + In support of the proceedings of congress, Hamilton, during July and August, published a series of papers which he called "The Continentalist." "There is hardly a man," said he, "who will not acknowledge the confederation unequal to a vigorous prosecution of the war, or to the preservation of the union in peace. The federal government, too weak at first, will continually grow weaker."† "Already some of the states have evaded or refused the demands of congress; the currency is depreciated; public credit is at the lowest ebb; our army deficient in numbers and unprovided with everything; the enemy making an alarming progress in the southern states; Cornwallis still formidable to Virginia. As in explanation of our embarrassments nothing can be alleged to the disaffection. of the people, we must have recourse to impolicy and mismanagement in their rulers. We ought, therefore, not only to strain every nerve to render the present campaign as decisive as possible, but we ought, without delay, to enlarge the powers of congress. Every plan of which this is not the foundation. will be illusory. The separate exertions of the states will never suffice. Nothing but a well-proportioned exertion of the resources for the whole, under the direction of a common *Report of the grand committee. MS. Report of the committee of three. Continentalist. Reprinted in J. C. Hamilton's edition of the Federalist, cxl., cxli., cxlv., cxlvi., cxlvii., cxlviii. |