No. IV. TERRITORIAL ACQUISITIONS, 1783-1853 A marks portion of Maine which was abandoned in 1842, p. 438 CHAPTER VI THE CONSTITUTION, 1783-1789 Books for Consultation General Readings. - Johnston's American Politics, 3-18; Walker's Making of the Nation, 1-73; *Frothingham's Rise of the Republic, 569-610; Fiske's Civil Government, 186–267. Special Accounts. -*Winsor's America, VII; *Von Holst's Constitutional History, I; Lodge's Washington, II; Schouler's United States; *McMaster's People of the United States, I; Fiske's Critical Period. Sources. Biographies and writings of Washington, Madison, Hamilton, Jay, Franklin, J. Adams, Gouverneur Morris, Rufus King, Mason, Henry, R. H. Lee, Gerry, for titles see Guide, §§ 25, 32, 33; Journals of Congress; Journal of the Convention; Madison's Notes; Elliot's Debates; American History Leaflets; Old South Leaflets. Maps. Hinsdale's Old Northwest, Nos. vi-ix; Winsor's America, VII, App. 1. Bibliography. Channing and Hart, Guide to American History, §§ 56 a, 56 b (General Readings), §§ 142, 149-156 (Topics and References). Illustrative Material. Landon's Constitutional History; *Tucker's History of the United States; Gay's Madison; Morse's Franklin; *G. T. Curtis's History of the Constitution, or his Constitutional History; *Bancroft's History of the Constitution or his United States (last revision), VI; *Story's Commentaries; *Thayer's Cases on Constitutional Law; Hamilton's Federalist; R. H. Lee's Letters of a Federalist Farmer; Scharf's Maryland; Cutler's Ordinance of 1787; Dunn's Indiana; Hinsdale's Old Northwest; Roosevelt's Winning of the West, III; Sumner's Finances of the Revolution; Pomeroy's Constitutional Law; Hinsdale's American Government; *Fiske's American Political Ideas, ch. ii; American History told by Contemporaries. THE CONSTITUTION, 1783-1789 166. Nationalism and Particularism. At the beginning of the Revolution it seemed as if public opinion were favor Feeling of nationality, 1774-76. Hart's Con able to the formation of a national government. On the first day of the meeting of the Continental Congress, Patrick Henry asserted that the colonial governments were destroyed, temporaries, and asked, "Where are your landmarks, your boundaries of II, No. 153. Tendency toward particu larism. Franklin's No. 20. colonies ?" According to him, "The distinctions between Virginians, Pennsylvanians, New Yorkers, and New Englanders are no more; I am not a Virginian, but an American." The question of the mode of voting in Congress was then under discussion, and Henry proposed that the freemen of the several colonies should be represented according to numbers. As there was then no means of ascertaining the population of the several colonies, this proposition could not be accepted and Congress decided that each colony should have one vote, on the ground that Congress could not then determine the importance of each colony. For some time, certainly until the end of 1776, the Continental Congress occupied the most commanding position of any governmental body in America: the people of the several states asked its advice as to the regulation of their affairs and followed its recommendations (p. 177). Before long, however, Congress lost much of its authority, and the state governments, once formed, rapidly gained the respect of the people. This change of sentiment was partly due to the fact that the state legislatures soon acquired the right to appoint the delegates of the state in Congress; but it was due more especially to the fact that the local legislatures were more under the control of the people than was Congress. It was in these circumstances that the Articles of Confederation were drawn up and sent to the states for ratification. 167. Formation of the Articles of Confederation. - The earliest draft of a plan for a federal union was made by Franklin, and was read in Congress on July 21, 1775. In June, 1776, Richard Henry Lee of Virginia coupled with the resolution of independence another for the formation of Articles of Confederation (p. 181). It is possible that the expectation was that the declaration and the frame of 1777] The Articles of Confederation 217 tion, adopted Fiske's Critical Pe riod, 90-101; *Froth ingham's Republic, government would form one instrument, as was later the case in Virginia. A "grand committee," consisting of one member from each colony, was appointed to devise a plan. of union; it reported through its chairman, John Dickinson, in the middle of July, and its report is hence known as Dickinson's draft. The matter was discussed at intervals Articles of until November, 1777, when the Articles were adopted Confederaand sent to the states. They vary in form and language 1777. from Dickinson's draft, but resemble it very closely in all essential features. It will be well, perhaps, to note a few of the differences between Franklin's draft and the report of the committee. Franklin provided for the regulation of "general commerce by the Congress; this was confided to the states in Dickinson's draft, except in so far as commerce was affected by treaties entered into by Con John Dickinson gress. In Franklin's scheme representation in Congress was to be distributed among the states in proportion to their population, and each delegate was to have one vote; in the committee's report a state might send as many delegates as it chose between two and seven, but each state should have only one vote. Franklin provided for amendments by vote of a majority of the state assemblies; Dickinson required the consent of all the state legislatures to any change, and thereby made change impossible. 561-572. Leaflets, The Articles ation, and other plans of federal Union. American History Leaflets, 20. The Articles compared with the Union of Scotland. 168. The Articles of Confederation. The best, in fact of Confeder- the only, way to understand the new arrangement for government, and to comprehend its place in the history of the United States, is to study with care the document itself and to compare it with the Articles of Confederation of the New England colonies (p. 80) and with the Albany Plan of Union (p. 119) on the one side, and with the ConstituNos. 7, 8, 14, tion (p. 237) on the other. It is also very helpful, but more difficult, to study it in connection with the governmental arrangements of Great Britain after 1603, and before the Act of Union of 1707, and with the actual constitution of the kingdom after that time. During the first of these periods England and Scotland had the same king; each kingdom, however, had its own legislative body and its own England and system of laws; the Act of Union brought about a change in this latter regard, the two kingdoms henceforth having one legislative body and one system of laws. In the former time, for instance, the colonies, by the navigation acts, could no more trade with Scotland than they could with France; in the latter time, Scotland and England were regarded as one country as far as colonial trade was concerned. The first form of union is known as a personal union; the latter is usually termed a legislative union. Before the Revolution the colonies had denied that there was a legislative union between the several colonies and the home state. They maintained that the Union was merely a personal union through the king, to whom all owed allegiance. In their endeavor to find some means of replacing the discarded authority of Britain, they constructed a government which should have the power which they had contended belonged to the British government, and no more. Under the Confederation each state possessed its own legislative body and its own system of laws; Congress took the place of the British king and exercised very nearly the same authority that the colonists had contended belonged to that monarch. For instance, Congress could make war and conclude peace, and maintain an army and navy, but it could not tax the Analysis of the Articles. Portions to be memo rized. Guide, § 47 i. |