wunder · LibraryVolume 31, Folio 346.
Read in the Wunder reader — freeFootnote 189:
McMaster and Stone, Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, p. 706.
Footnote 190:
Simpson, Eminent Philadelphians, p. 373.
Footnote 191:
McMaster and Stone, op. cit., p. 707.
Footnote 192:
Simpson, op. cit., 373.
Footnote 193:
Sumner, The Financier and the Finances of the Revolution, Vol. II, p. 294.
Footnote 194:
Maclay, Journal (1890 ed.), p. 178.
Footnote 195:
Ms. Treasury Department: Register of Certificates of Public Debt Presented to the Auditor of the Treasury.
Footnote 196:
Ibid., See Ledger E, Treasury, 3%, Vol. 44, folio 335. Also Ledger C, Treasury, 6%, Vol. 42, folio 300 for small entries.
Footnote 197:
Morris Mss. in the Library of Congress: Private Letter Book, Vol. I, p. 529. Marshall (a brother of John Marshall) was the confidential and trusted agent of Morris in large transactions in land.
Footnote 198:
Bigelow, Life of Franklin, Vol. III, p. 470.
Footnote 199:
Haskins, The Yazoo Land Companies, p. 62.
Footnote 200:
Bigelow, Works, Vol. X, pp. 206 ff.
Footnote 201:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 232.
Footnote 202:
Consult the Loan Office Records of New Hampshire in the Treasury Department, passim.
Footnote 203:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger C, Treasury, 6%, Vol. 42, folio 368.
Footnote 204:
State Papers: Public Lands, Vol. I, p. 118.
Footnote 205:
Hammond, State Papers of New Hampshire, Vol. XVIII, p. 790.
Footnote 206:
Sanderson, Lives of the Signers (1831 ed.), Vol. I, p. 197; Austin, Life of Gerry.
Footnote 207:
Sanderson, Biography of the Signers, Vol. I, p. 230.
Footnote 208:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 356.
Footnote 209:
Ibid., 413.
Footnote 210:
Ms. Treasury Department: Mass. Loan Office, Register of Certificates of Interest Issued (Vellum bound), folios 15 ff.
Footnote 211:
Ibid., Mass. Loan Office, Certificates for Liquidated Debt, folios 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. This paper had evidently been bought by Gerry for speculation.
Footnote 212:
Ibid., Loan Office, Pa., 1790–1791, folio 60.
Footnote 213:
Ibid., Ledger C, 3% Stocks, Pa., folio 37.
Footnote 214:
Ibid., Massachusetts Loan Office, 1791, Item 582; this was also paper bought up by Gerry for speculation.
Footnote 215:
Gerry was accused by Ellsworth (q.v.) of having turned against the new Constitution because the Convention refused to put the old continental paper money on the same basis as other securities. Toward the close of the Convention, “Gerry,” says Ellsworth, “introduced a motion respecting the redemption of the old continental money—that it should be placed on a footing with other liquidated securities of the United States. As Mr. Gerry was supposed to be possessed of large quantities of this species of paper, his motion appeared to be founded in such bare-faced selfishness and injustice, that it at once accounted for all his former plausibility and concession, while the rejection of it by the convention inspired its author with the utmost rage and intemperate opposition to the whole system he had formerly praised.” Ford, Essays on the Constitution, p. 174. Gerry indignantly denied that he ever made such a motion in the Convention, or that he held much continental money. Ibid., p. 127. It does not appear in Farrand, Records, that any such motion was made in the Convention; and under the circumstances it seems not unjust to remark that Ellsworth’s charges were made with very bad grace, particularly in view of the fact that he and members of his family and intimate friends held considerable amounts of public securities. “Bare-faced selfishness” was not monopolized by Gerry in the Convention.
Footnote 216:
See above, p. 49.
Footnote 217:
King, Life and Correspondence, Vol. I, p. 72.
Footnote 218:
A. M. Dyer, The Ownership of Ohio Lands, p. 68.
Footnote 219:
Sumner, The Financier and the Finances of the Revolution, Vol. II, pp. 253 ff. See Turner, Pioneer History of the Holland Purchase of Western New York, pp. 326 ff.
Footnote 220:
T. Wyman, Genealogies and Estates of Charlestown, Vol. I, p. 424.
Footnote 221:
To be found in the Hamilton Mss., Library of Congress.
Footnote 222:
Haskins, The Yazoo Land Companies.
Footnote 223:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 8.
Footnote 224:
Hamilton, Works (Lodge ed.), Vol. VI, p. 453.
Footnote 225:
Ibid., Vol. VI, p. 454; Annals of Congress, Vol. III, pp. 900 ff.
Footnote 226:
See below, p. 112.
Footnote 227:
Mr. Lodge calls the three investigators “inquisitors,” but this seems like a strong word to apply to members of Congress engaged in running down rumors relative to the official conduct of a government officer. Works (Lodge ed.), Vol. VI, p. 450 note. The impropriety of Monroe’s action in allowing the story to escape is another matter.
Footnote 228:
The pamphlet by Hamilton in his defence is printed in the Lodge edition, Vol. VI, pp. 449 ff.
Footnote 229:
Compare the date of the receipts on page 20 of Mr. Fox’s A Study in Hamilton with the date in the pamphlet (Lodge ed.), Vol. VI, p. 494.
Footnote 230:
Works of Hamilton (Lodge ed.), Vol. VIII, p. 268. Perhaps the remnant of an old account of Hamilton on the Treasury Books in 1797 refers to this petty holding. Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger E, Treasury, 3%, Vol. 44, folio 434.
Footnote 231:
J. A. Hamilton, Reminiscences, p. 18.
Footnote 232:
W. Maclay, Journal (1890 ed.), p. 188.
Footnote 233:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 188.
Footnote 234:
Reminiscences of J. A. Hamilton, p. 18.
Footnote 235:
Ms. Treasury Department: N. Y. Loan Office, 1791, folio 24. See also the volume of N. Y. Loan Office Receipts in the Mss. Division of the Library of Congress for General Schuyler’s receipts for interest on securities. The intimate correspondence between Hamilton and General Schuyler during the period of the formation of the Constitution was destroyed by a son of one of the latter’s executors. American Historical Review, Vol. X, p. 181. See Tuckerman, Life of General Schuyler.
Footnote 236:
Ms. Treasury Department: N. Y. Office, Deferred 6%, 1790–1796, folio 325.
Footnote 237:
PHILADELPHIA, Feby. 24^{th}, 1790.
I have had this day the honor of yours inclosing your power of substitution on behalf of Mr. Church. At present the sale of stock, and indeed every other money transaction is nearly at a stand. The produce of the State and the sale of Bills of Exchange will alone command it, untill we receive a supply from sea.
Mr. Constable has informed me of the purchase he had made of 20 shares and when they appear the transfer will be compleated.
I observe what you say respecting the sale of what remains of Mr. Church’s shares and shall do whatever may be in my power to dispose of them, whenever I receive the certificates and your orders to make the sale. I am, Sir, with great respect,
Y^r Obed^t Serv^t THOS. WILLING.
Hamilton Mss., Vol. XXIII, p. 1.
Footnote 238:
Library of Congress: Hamilton Mss., Vol. XX, p. 180.
Footnote 239:
Ibid., Vol. XX, pp. 182 ff. Lodge omits references to this correspondence on Seton’s part, although he gives selected letters from Hamilton to Seton. Works of Alexander Hamilton, Vol. VIII, pp. 231 ff.
Footnote 240:
Library of Congress: Hamilton Mss., Vol. XXIII, p. 180.
Footnote 241:
A. M. Dyer, The Ownership of Ohio Lands, p. 69.
Footnote 242:
Mss. Library of Congress: Treasury Department, 1790–1792 (Washington papers), folio 291.
Footnote 243:
P. 108.
Footnote 244:
Life and Correspondence of Rufus King, Vol. I, p. 402.
Footnote 245:
Library of Congress, Hamilton Mss., Vol. XVI, p. 126. The editor of King’s letters says this letter is lost.
Footnote 246:
Hamilton’s Works (Lodge ed.), Vol. VIII, p. 234.
Footnote 247:
Ibid., Vol. VIII, p. 240, date March 14, 1792.
Footnote 248:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger B, N. Y. Office, 1790, Deferred 6% Stock, folio 260; also N. Y. Office, Deferred 6%, 1790–1796, folio 144.
Footnote 249:
T. A. Glenn, William Churchill Houston, pp. 71–72 (Privately printed), copy in Library of Congress.
Footnote 250:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 97.
Footnote 251:
Simpson, Eminent Philadelphians, p. 596.
Footnote 252:
His private fortune was much impaired by the failure of Robert Morris, for whom he had pledged his faith in several transactions. Morris Mss., Library of Congress: Private Letter Book, Vol. II, pp. 193, 261, 327, 351, 414.
Footnote 253:
H. Binney, Leaders of the Old Philadelphia Bar, p. 83; State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 81.
Footnote 254:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 93.
Footnote 255:
Census of 1790: Heads of Families, p. 51; consult Index.
Footnote 256:
Appleton, Encyclopædia of American Biography, Vol. III, p. 426.
Footnote 257:
Ms. Treasury Department: Maryland Loan Office, 1790–1797, folio 14.
Footnote 258:
Ibid., folio 134.
Footnote 259:
Beardsley, Life and Times of William Samuel Johnson, pp. 8–9.
Footnote 260:
Writings of Jefferson (Ford ed.), Vol. I, p. 223.
Footnote 261:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger B, New York Office, Deferred 6%, 1790, folios 10, 152, 457.
Footnote 262:
Folios 152 and 457 of above Ledger B.
Footnote 263:
Ms. Treasury Department: Connecticut Loan Office, Ledger A, folio 15; Ledger B, folio 15; Ledger C, folio 15. Connecticut Loan Office Receipts, Library of Congress, Mss. Division.
Footnote 264:
Ibid., New York Loan Office, 6% Ledger, 1791–1797, folio 161; ibid., New York Office, Deferred 6%, 1790–1796, folio 107—two entries of about $25,000 each. Ledger B, New York Office, Deferred 6% Stock, 1790, folios, 152, 457. Ledger E, Treasury, 3%, Vol. 44, folio 529. There can be no question of the identity of the Robert Charles Johnson who appears on the public security records and the Robert Charles Johnson who was the son of William Samuel. The cross entries between father and son in the records constitute one piece of evidence. The residence of Robert Charles in Stratford presents another, for that was the family place. Furthermore, the signature to the Loan Office Receipts is the signature of Robert Charles, son of William Samuel Johnson.
Footnote 265:
Rufus King, Life and Correspondence, Vol. I, 132.
Footnote 266:
Life and Correspondence of King, Vol. I, p. 624.
Footnote 267:
Writings (Ford ed.), Vol. I, p. 223. Maclay makes some quite uncomplimentary remarks about King, Journal, p. 315.
Footnote 268:
Dunlap’s Daily Advertiser, October 23, 1791.
Footnote 269:
Ms. Treasury Department: N. Y. Office, 6%, Ledger, 1791–1799, folio 14. Ibid., Ledger B, N. Y. Office, Deferred 6%, 1790, folio 60; ibid., Deferred 6%, 1790–1796, folio 14. The Treasury Index gives a number of references to volumes not found.
Footnote 270:
See above, p. 112.
Footnote 271:
C. W. Brewster, Rambles about Old Portsmouth (1859), pp. 360–361.
Footnote 272:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 233.
Footnote 273:
Batchellor, New Hampshire State Papers, Vol. XXI, p. 804 note.
Footnote 274:
Ibid., Vol. XX, p. 868.
Footnote 275:
Batchellor, New Hampshire State Papers, Vol. XX, p. 872.
Footnote 276:
Journal of William Maclay (1890 ed.), p. 178.
Footnote 277:
Ms. Treasury Department: See Loan Office Certificate Book, New Hampshire (Loan of 1777 passim).
Footnote 278:
Ibid., New Hampshire Loan Office, Journal A, folio 4, date March, 1791, and passim.
Footnote 279:
Hammond, State Papers of New Hampshire, Vol. XVIII, p. 824.
Footnote 280:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 90.
Footnote 281:
Ms. Treasury Department: New York Loan Office, 1791, folio 97.
Footnote 282:
Johannis, Garrit, Abraham, John J., Henry R., and other Lansings appear on Ledger C, Funded 6%, 1790, Ms. Treasury Department. Consult Index.
Footnote 283:
L. Elmer, The Constitution and Government of New Jersey (1872), pp. 57–59.
Footnote 284:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger B, N. Y. Office, Deferred 6% Stock, 1790, folios, 72, 306, etc.
Footnote 285:
Ibid., N. Y., 6%, Ledger, 1791–1797, folio 123.
Footnote 286:
Ibid., Virginia Loan Office, 1791, under date of September 30, 1791; Ledger A, Funded 6% Stock, 1790, folio 123.
Footnote 287:
In a letter of February 13, 1791, Madison advises his father to fund his Virginia certificates at Richmond: “I do not see what better you can do with your certificates than to subscribe them to the public fund at Richmond.” Writings of James Madison (1865 ed.), Vol. I, p. 529.
Footnote 288:
Writings (1865 ed.), Vol. I, p. 538.
Footnote 289:
National Encyclopædia of Biography, Vol. IV, p. 420.
Footnote 290:
The Census of 1790—Heads of Families, p. 168, places the number of Martin’s slaves at 47.
Footnote 291:
Herring, National Portrait Gallery, Vol. IV.
Footnote 292:
See Index to Private Letter Books of Robert Morris, Library of Congress: Mss. Division.
Footnote 293:
Census of 1790—Heads of Families, Maryland, p. 18.
Footnote 294:
Ms. Treasury Department: Maryland Loan Office, 1790–1797, folios, 80, 81, 194.
Footnote 295:
See below, p. 205.
Footnote 296:
Rowland, The Life of George Mason, Vol. I, pp. 48 ff., 55 ff.
Footnote 297:
Ibid., I, p. 56.
Footnote 298:
Rowland, The Life of George Mason, Vol. I, p. 58.
Footnote 299:
Ibid., I, p. 60.
Footnote 300:
Ibid., I, pp. 117, 154.
Footnote 301:
Ibid., I, p. 119.
Footnote 302:
Ibid., I, p. 270.
Footnote 303:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 368.
Footnote 304:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger A, Funded 6% Stock, 1790, folio 130; see Loan Office Virginia, 1790–1793, folio 132. The Index gives references to other volumes not found, Vols. 41, 43, 45, folios 93, 15, and 18 respectively.
Footnote 305:
Elliot, Debates (1836 ed.), Vol. III, pp. 528–529.
Footnote 306:
Ibid., p. 529.
Footnote 307:
Duyckinck, Cyclopœdia of American Literature (1855 ed.), Vol. I, p. 283.
Footnote 308:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger A, Funded 6% Stock, 1790, folio 18.
Footnote 309:
Ibid., Loan Office: Register of Subscriptions, Virginia (1791), see date, no folio given.
Footnote 310:
Dunlap’s Daily Advertiser, October 23, 1791.
Footnote 311:
Magazine of American History, Vol. VII, p. 104.
Footnote 312:
Steiner, The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry, p. 2.
Footnote 313:
Hamilton Mss., Library of Congress, Vol. XXIII, p. 156.
Footnote 314:
T. Montgomery, History of the Insurance Company of North America, p. 142.
Footnote 315:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger E, Treasury, 3%, Vol. 45, folio 22.
Footnote 316:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 8.
Footnote 317:
Census of 1790—Heads of Families, Maryland, p. 41.
Footnote 318:
Ms. Treasury Department: Loan Office Maryland, 1790–1797, 3%, folios 72, 135, and other loan office records of that state, passim.
Footnote 319:
McMaster and Stone, Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, p. 701.
Footnote 320:
The American Museum, Vol. II, p. 248.
Footnote 321:
Ms. Treasury Department: Pa. Loan Office Certificates, 1788, folio 45.
Footnote 322:
Ibid.: Ledger C, 3% Stock, Pa., folio 48. John F. Mifflin was a holder of paper to the amount of several thousand dollars funded in 1790. Ibid., Loan Office, Pa., 1790–1791, folio 6; Ledger C, 3% Stock, Pa., folio 6.
Footnote 323:
Roosevelt, G. Morris, pp. 1, 24.
Footnote 324:
Ibid., p. 167.
Footnote 325:
Oberholtzer, Robert Morris, p. 4.
Footnote 326:
Ibid., p. 108.
Footnote 327:
For his multifarious operations see Oberholtzer, Robert Morris; Sumner, The Financier and the Finances of the American Revolution, 2 vols.
Footnote 328:
Library of Congress: Morris Mss. Consult the Index to the three volumes of Morris’ Letter Books of Private Correspondence for references, under “James Marshall.” Only by turning over this enormous mass of correspondence can one gain a correct notion of the ramifications of Morris’ interests and the number of prominent men involved in his schemes.
Footnote 329:
Hamilton Mss., Library of Congress, Vol. XXII, p. 179; two minor illustrations of his operations may be given: January 1, 1791, $7588.78, July 1, 1792, $26,408.66. See also the enormous transactions in the name of Willing and Morris scattered through the books of nearly every state. Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger C, 3%, Pa., folio 334; Register of Certificates of Public Debt Presented: Auditor of Treasury; folios not given. Consult Index to holders of old securities in the Treasury Department.
Footnote 330:
Op. cit., pp. 237 ff.
Footnote 331:
L. Elmer, The Constitution and Government of New Jersey, p. 77.
Footnote 332:
American Historical Review, Vol. III, p. 312.
Footnote 333:
Calendar of Madison Correspondence, Library of Congress. Mss.
Footnote 334:
Herring, National Portrait Gallery, Vol. IV.
Footnote 335:
Census of 1790—Heads of Families, S.C., p. 33.
Footnote 336:
Speaking of the nature of the practice in Charleston just after the Revolution, Charles Fraser says, in Reminiscences of Charleston, p. 71: “It was stated by the Duc de Liancourt, who was well acquainted with most or all of the gentlemen named, that General Pinckney, Mr. Rutledge, Mr. Pringle, and Mr. Holmes, made from eighteen to twenty-three thousand dollars a year.... The extensive commercial business of Charleston at that time opened a wide field of litigation. Our courts were constantly employed in heavy insurance cases—in questions of charter party, foreign and inland bills of exchange, and in adjusting foreign claims. There was also a good deal of business in admiralty, and, occasionally, a rich prize case.”
Footnote 337:
Ms. Treasury Department: Loan Office, S.C., 1791–1797, folio 38. For other entries, Loan Office, S.C., folio 70; a later entry of $8721.53 in trust for Mary Pinckney, ibid., folio 152.
Footnote 338:
Census of 1790—Heads of Families, S.C., p. 34.
Footnote 339:
Ms. Treasury Department: Loan Office, S.C., 1791–1797, folio 221.
Footnote 340:
Madison Mss., Library of Congress, under date of March 28, 1789.
Footnote 341:
M. Conway, Edmund Randolph, p. 48.
Footnote 342:
Ibid., p. 372.
Footnote 343:
Ibid., p. 384.
Footnote 344:
Ms. Treasury Department: Current Accounts, Va., 1791–1796, folios 6, 13, 21; Ledger B, Assumed Debt, Va., folio 87.
Footnote 345:
Hamilton Mss., Library of Congress, Vol. XX, p. 57.
Footnote 346:
Sanderson, Biography of the Signers (1831 ed.), Vol. III, p. 351.
Footnote 347:
W. T. Read, Life of George Read, p. 575.
Footnote 348:
History of the Bank of North America, p. 147.
Footnote 349:
Ms. Treasury Department: Loan Office, Delaware, 1777–1784, passim. His mother and daughter bore the name of “Mary.” J. W. Reed, The Reed Family, pp. 433 and 436.
Footnote 350:
Ibid., Ledger E, Treasury, 3%, Vol. 45, folio 202. The Index gives references to several other volumes which were not found.
Footnote 351:
Herring, National Portrait Gallery, Vol. IV.
Footnote 352:
Flanders, Lives of the Chief Justices, Vol. I, p. 551.
Footnote 353:
Census of 1790—Heads of Families, S.C., p. 42.
Footnote 354:
When Roger Sherman resided in Park Lane and ran a store in New Milford, Connecticut, he lost money through the depreciation of bills of credit, and he thereupon declared a war on paper money which he continued to the end of his days. Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, 1906–1907, pp. 214 ff.
Footnote 355:
Sanderson, Lives of the Signers, Vol. II, p. 66.
Footnote 356:
Ms. Treasury Department: Loan Office: Connecticut, Ledgers A, B, and C, Threes and Sixes, folio 28 in each; January, 1792.
Footnote 357:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 95.
Footnote 358:
Census of 1790—Heads of Families, N.C., p. 130.
Footnote 359:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger E, Treasury, 3%, Vol. 45, folio 308.
Footnote 360:
Encyclopædia of National Biography, Vol. I, p. 110.
Footnote 361:
Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings, 1791–1835, Vol. I, pp. 290 ff.
Footnote 362:
Ms. Treasury Department: Mass. Loan Office, 1791, Vol. III, item No. 1284.
Footnote 363:
Sparks, Life of Washington, Appendix, No. IX.
Footnote 364:
W. C. Ford, The Federalist, p. xi, note 3.
Footnote 365:
Bancroft, History of the Constitution (1882 ed.), Vol. II, p. 411.
Footnote 366:
D. Hosack, Biographical Memoir of Hugh Williamson, p. 18.
Footnote 367:
Ms. Treasury Department: Loan Office, N.C., 1791, folio 3.
Footnote 368:
Hamilton Mss., Library of Congress, Vol. XXIV, pp. 70 ff.
Footnote 369:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. IV, p. 678.
Footnote 370:
Hosack, op. cit., p. 85.
Footnote 371:
Simpson, Eminent Philadelphians, p. 966.
Footnote 372:
Oberholtzer, Robert Morris, p. 108.
Footnote 373:
History of the Insurance Company of North America, p. 146.
Footnote 374:
State Papers: Public Lands, Vol. I, p. 141.
Footnote 375:
Yazoo Land Companies, p. 83.
Footnote 376:
Ms. Treasury Department: Ledger C, 3% Stock, Pa., folio 195.
Footnote 377:
Sanderson, Biography of the Signers (1831 ed.), Vol. IV, pp. 172 ff.
Footnote 378:
Ms. Treasury Department: Loan Office: Register of Subscriptions, Va., 1791, see date. Also Ledger A, Assumed Debt, Va., folio 32.
Footnote 379:
Appendix to the Secret Proceedings and Debates of the Federal Convention (1821, Albany).
Footnote 380:
Records of the New York Loan Office in the Treasury Department.
Footnote 381:
See above, p. 75, n. 3.
Footnote 382:
See above, p. 124. Livingston’s holdings are problematical.
Footnote 383:
The fact that a few members of the Convention, who had considerable economic interests at stake, refused to support the Constitution does not invalidate the general conclusions here presented. In the cases of Yates, Lansing, Luther Martin, and Mason, definite economic reasons for their action are forthcoming; but this is a minor detail.
Footnote 384:
A great deal of this valuable material has been printed in the Documentary History of the Constitution, Vols. IV and V; a considerable amount has been published in the letters and papers of the eminent men of the period; but an enormous mass still remains in manuscript form. Fortunately, such important papers as those of Washington, Hamilton, Madison, and others are in the Library of Congress; but they are not complete, of course.
Footnote 385:
From this point of view, the old conception of the battle at Philadelphia as a contest between small and large states—as political entities—will have to be severely modified. See Professor Farrand’s illuminating paper on the so-called compromises of the Constitution in the Report of the American Historical Association, 1903, Vol. I, pp. 73 ff. J. C. Welling, “States’ Rights Conflict over the Public Lands,” ibid. (1888), pp. 184 ff.
Footnote 386:
The Federalist, No. 73.
Footnote 387:
See J. A. Smith, The Spirit of American Government.
Footnote 388:
See Noah Webster’s consideration of the subject of government and property; Ford, Pamphlets on the Constitution, pp. 57 ff.
Footnote 389:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 203.
Footnote 390:
This view was set forth by Madison in a letter to Jefferson in 1788. “Wherever the real power in a Government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our Governments the real power lies in the majority of the Community, and the invasion of private rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of Government contrary to the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the Government is the mere instrument of the major number of the constituents. This is a truth of great importance, but not yet sufficiently attended to, and is probably more strongly impressed upon my mind by facts, and reflections suggested by them, than on yours which has contemplated abuses of power issuing from a very different quarter. Wherever there is an interest and power to do wrong, wrong will generally be done, and not less readily by a powerful and interested party than by a powerful and interested prince.” Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. V, p. 88.
Footnote 391:
The Federalist, No. 48.
Footnote 392:
Ibid., No. 49.
Footnote 393:
The Federalist, No. 51.
Footnote 394:
Ibid., No. 51.
Footnote 395:
Ibid., No. 60.
Footnote 396:
Beard, The Supreme Court and the Constitution. See also the criticisms of this work by Professor W. F. Dodd, in the American Historical Review for January, 1913.
Footnote 397:
Number 78.
Footnote 398:
American Historical Association Report (1899), Vol. I, p. 108.
Footnote 399:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, pp. 123–124.
Footnote 400:
Ibid., pp. 201 ff.
Footnote 401:
Ibid., p. 216.
Footnote 402:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 121.
Footnote 403:
Ibid., pp. 121–122.
Footnote 404:
Debate in Farrand, Records, Vol. II, pp. 123–124.
Footnote 405:
See above, pp. 65 ff. The members of the Convention could not foresee the French Revolution which was to break out just as the new federal government was being put into operation in 1789.
Footnote 406:
It was a curious turn of fortune that this provision prevented the agrarians and populists in 1894 from shifting a part of the burden of taxes to the great cities of the East. Thus the Zweck im Recht is sometimes reversed.
Footnote 407:
Clark, The Records of North Carolina, Vol. XX, p. 778.
Footnote 408:
The Federalist, Number 12.
Footnote 409:
The Federalist, No. 4.
Footnote 410:
Ibid.
Footnote 411:
The Federalist, No. 11.
Footnote 412:
Washington’s farewell address which was partially written by Hamilton is one of the most ingenious partisan documents ever written. It, too, has its economic interpretation.
Footnote 413:
The Federalist, No. 11.
Footnote 414:
Ibid., No. 21.
Footnote 415:
The Federalist, No. 43.
Footnote 416:
Ibid., No. 35.
Footnote 417:
See the entire letter of Blount, Spaight, and Williamson, cited above, p. 169.
Footnote 418:
No. 11.
Footnote 419:
J. C. Welling, “States’ Rights Conflict over the Public Lands,” Report of the American Historical Association (1888), pp. 174 ff.
Footnote 420:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 371.
Footnote 421:
Ibid., p. 371.
Footnote 422:
There are, of course, some restrictions on Congress laid down in the Constitution; but the powers of the national legislature are limited and the restrictions are not of the same significance. Radical action on the part of the national legislature was anticipated in the structure of the government itself, but specific provision had to be made against the assaults of popular majorities in state legislatures on property rights.
Footnote 423:
Writings of James Madison (1865), Vol. I, p. 350. This entire letter deserves careful study by anyone who would understand the Constitution as an economic document.
Footnote 424:
The Federalist, No. 44.
Footnote 425:
Ms. Library of Congress: Treasury Department Letters, 1789–1790 (Washington Papers), folio 297.
Footnote 426:
The American Museum, Vol. I, p. 118.
Footnote 427:
See below, p. 295.
Footnote 428:
Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheaton, pp. 213 ff.
Footnote 429:
The Federalist, No. 6.
Footnote 430:
The Federalist, No. 3.
Footnote 431:
Ibid., No. 5.
Footnote 432:
Ibid.
Footnote 433:
Ibid., No. 6.
Footnote 434:
The Federalist, No. 4.
Footnote 435:
Ibid., No. 6.
Footnote 436:
Ibid., No. 7.
Footnote 437:
A few whose views were not ascertained are omitted.
Footnote 438:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 469.
Footnote 439:
Above, p. 65.
Footnote 440:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 100.
Footnote 441:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 421.
Footnote 442:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 32.
Footnote 443:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 33.
Footnote 444:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 390.
Footnote 445:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 144.
Footnote 446:
Ibid., p. 529.
Footnote 447:
Ibid., p. 562.
Footnote 448:
Ibid., p. 605.
Footnote 449:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 300.
Footnote 450:
Sanderson, op. cit., p. 168.
Footnote 451:
Ibid., p. 169.
Footnote 452:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 593.
Footnote 453:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 542.
Footnote 454:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 350.
Footnote 455:
McRee, Life and Correspondence of James Iredell, Vol. II, pp. 161, 168.
Footnote 456:
Peele, Lives of Distinguished North Carolinians, p. 75. Davie’s great collection of papers was destroyed in Sherman’s raid. Ibid., p. 78.
Footnote 457:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 86.
Footnote 458:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 202.
Footnote 459:
Farrand, Ibid., Vol. II, p. 207.
Footnote 460:
H. J. Ford, Rise and Growth of American Politics, p. 113.
Footnote 461:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, pp. 57, 58, 63, 101, 108, 111.
Footnote 462:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 73.
Footnote 463:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 207.
Footnote 464:
Beard, The Supreme Court and the Constitution, pp. 71–72.
Footnote 465:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 201.
Footnote 466:
Ibid., pp. 362, 529, 589.
Footnote 467:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 48; Vol. III, p. 297.
Footnote 468:
Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 94, 99.
Footnote 469:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 204.
Footnote 470:
Scharf and Wescott, History of Philadelphia, Vol. I, p. 447.
Footnote 471:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 48.
Footnote 472:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 154.
Footnote 473:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 122 and pp. 73–79.
Footnote 474:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 288.
Footnote 475:
Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 299 ff.
Footnote 476:
Farrand, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 48.
Footnote 477:
See above, p. 70.
Footnote 478:
H. Binney, Leaders of the Old Bar of Philadelphia, p. 86.
Footnote 479:
Ibid., p. 87.
Footnote 480:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 66.
Footnote 481:
Beard, The Supreme Court and the Constitution, p. 29.
Footnote 482:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 439.
Footnote 483:
See below, p. 312.
Footnote 484:
Observations on Government, Including Some Animadversions on Mr. Adams’s Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, etc., published in 1787, by Livingston, under the pen-name of “A Farmer of New Jersey.” The pamphlet is sometimes ascribed to J. Stevens, but there is good authority for believing that Livingston is the author. It is not inconsistent with his notions on judicial control; see American Historical Review, Vol. IV, pp. 460 ff.
Footnote 485:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 33.
Footnote 486:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 36.
Footnote 487:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. IV, p. 245.
Footnote 488:
Letter to Hamilton, Library of Congress, Hamilton Mss., Vol. XXIII, p. 93.
Footnote 489:
American Museum, Vol. IV, p. 333.
Footnote 490:
Steiner, Life and Correspondence, p. 527.
Footnote 491:
Above, p. 156. Mr. E. W. Crecraft, of Columbia University, has in preparation a dissertation on Madison’s political philosophy.
Footnote 492:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, pp. 214 ff.
Footnote 493:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 428.
Footnote 494:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 121.
Footnote 495:
See above, p. 128.
Footnote 496:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, p. 205.
Footnote 497:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, pp. 202 ff.
Footnote 498:
Roosevelt, Gouverneur Morris, p. 140.
Footnote 499:
See The Federalist, No. 51.
Footnote 500:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 409.
Footnote 501:
For an example see ibid., p. 11, note. He also entertained Washington during the sessions of the Convention. American Historical Association Report (1902), Vol. I, p. 92.
Footnote 502:
Beard, The Supreme Court and the Constitution, p. 37.
Footnote 503:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 474.
Footnote 504:
Ibid., Vol. III, p. 100.
Footnote 505:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 248.
Footnote 506:
Madison Mss., Library of Congress; date of March 28, 1788.
Footnote 507:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 426.
Footnote 508:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 122.
Footnote 509:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 51 and p. 218.
Footnote 510:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 136.
Footnote 511:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 200.
Footnote 512:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 409.
Footnote 513:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 582.
Footnote 514:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 249.
Footnote 515:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 211.
Footnote 516:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 364.
Footnote 517:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 48; also p. 154.
Footnote 518:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 525.
Footnote 519:
Beard, The Supreme Court and the Constitution, p. 53.
Footnote 520:
Elliot, Debates, Vol. IV, p. 207.
Footnote 521:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, 361.
Footnote 522:
Ibid., p. 72.
Footnote 523:
Ibid., p. 219.
Footnote 524:
Writings (Sparks ed., 1848), Vol. XII, p. 222; see below, p. 299.
Footnote 525:
Ibid., Vol. X, p. 429.
Footnote 526:
Ibid., Vol. X, p. 179.
Footnote 527:
Farrand, Records, Vol. II, pp. 201, 250.
Footnote 528:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 140.
Footnote 529:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 140.
Footnote 530:
Above, p. 146.
Footnote 531:
Farrand, Vol. II, 376.
Footnote 532:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 49 and passim.
Footnote 533:
Ibid., p. 52 and passim.
Footnote 534:
Ibid., p. 68 and passim.
Footnote 535:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 375; Vol. II, p. 125 and passim.
Footnote 536:
Ibid., Vol. I, p. 98; Beard, The Supreme Court and the Constitution, p. 42.
Footnote 537:
Lectures on Law (1804 ed.) Vol. I, pp. 398 ff.
Footnote 538:
Beard, The Supreme Court and the Constitution, p. 48.
Footnote 539:
“What they [the Convention] actually did, stripped of all fiction and verbiage, was to assume constituent powers, ordain a constitution of government and of liberty, and demand a plébiscite thereon over the heads of all existing legally organized powers. Had Julius or Napoleon committed these acts they would have been pronounced coups d’état.” Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law, Vol. I, p. 105.
Footnote 540:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, p. 123.
Footnote 541:
Ibid., Vol. II, p. 89.
Footnote 542:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 137.
Footnote 543:
Farrand, Records, Vol. I, pp. 255 ff.; p. 283.
Footnote 544:
No. 40.
Footnote 545:
Harding, The Federal Constitution in Massachusetts, pp. 118–119.
Footnote 546:
The Massachusetts Centinel, January 2, 1788.
Footnote 547:
Batchellor, State Papers of New Hampshire, Vol. XXI, pp. 151–165; Documentary History of the Constitution, II, p. 141.
Footnote 548:
J. B. Walker, A History of the New Hampshire Convention, pp. 22 ff.
Footnote 549:
Four members are not recorded, and “there is a pretty well authenticated tradition that a certain prominent federalist of Concord gave a dinner party on the last day of the session at which several members reckoned as opposed to ratification were present and discussing the dinner when the final vote was taken.” Ibid., p. 43, note.
Footnote 550:
Harding, The Federal Constitution in Massachusetts, p. 67.
Footnote 551:
Harding, op. cit., p. 99.
Footnote 552:
Harding, op. cit., p. 101.
Footnote 553:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. II, pp. 86–87; Connecticut Courant, October 22, 1787.
Footnote 554:
Bancroft, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 257.
Footnote 555:
Debates and Proceedings of the New York State Convention (1905 ed.), p. 3.
Footnote 556:
Bancroft, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 340.
Footnote 557:
Ibid., p. 340; and see below, p. 244.
Footnote 558:
State Papers: Miscellaneous, Vol. I, p. 7. For valuable side-lights on the opposition to the Constitution, see E. P. Smith’s essay, “The Movement towards a Second Constitutional Convention,” in Jameson, Essays in the Constitutional History of the United States, pp. 46 ff.
Footnote 559:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. II, pp. 46 ff.
Footnote 560:
Bancroft, History of the Constitution of the United States, Vol. II, p. 250; Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. II, p. 25; Delaware State Council Minutes, 1776–1792, pp. 1081–82 (Delaware Historical Society Papers); Connecticut Courant, Dec. 24, 1787.
Footnote 561:
See above, p. 82.
Footnote 562:
McMaster and Stone, Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, p. 3.
Footnote 563:
McMaster and Stone, op. cit., p. 4.
Footnote 564:
Ibid., p. 14.
Footnote 565:
Ibid., p. 15.
Footnote 566:
McMaster and Stone, op. cit., p. 20. The following year when the ratification of the Constitution was celebrated in Philadelphia, James Wilson, in an oration on the great achievement said: “A people free and enlightened, establishing and ratifying a system of government which they have previously considered, examined, and approved! This is the spectacle which we are assembled to celebrate; and it is the most dignified one that has yet appeared on our globe.... What is the object exhibited to our contemplation? A whole people exercising its first and greatest power—performing an act of sovereignty, original and unlimited!... Happy country! May thy happiness be perpetual!” Works (1804 ed.), Vol. III, pp. 299 ff.
Footnote 567:
Bancroft, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 278; Votes and Proceedings of the Senate of Maryland, November Session, 1787, pp. 5 ff.
Footnote 568:
Ibid., p. 283.
Footnote 569:
Bancroft, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 316. The resolution provided that the “election shall be held in the month of March next on the first day of the court to be held for each county, city, or corporation respectively.” The qualifications of voters were “the same as those now established by law.” Blair, The Virginia Convention of 1788, Vol. I, p. 56–57. Only freeholders were eligible to seats in the Convention. Ibid., p. 56. Hening, Statutes at Large, Vol. XII, p. 462.
Footnote 570:
Laws of North Carolina (1821), Vol. I, p. 597; North Carolina Assembly Journals, 1785–98, p. 22.
Footnote 571:
Bancroft, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 349.
Footnote 572:
Hugh Williamson, writing to Madison on May 21, 1789, said: “Our people near the sea-coast are in great pain on the idea of being shut out from the Union. They say that unless they can continue in the coasting trade without the alien duty, they must starve with their families or remove from the state. Can no exception be made in favor of such apparent aliens for so long a period as the first of January next?” Madison Mss., Library of Congress.
Footnote 573:
Bancroft, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 293.
Footnote 574:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. II, pp. 82 ff.
Footnote 575:
F. G. Bates, Rhode Island and the Union, pp. 192 ff.
Footnote 576:
Ibid., p. 197.
Footnote 577:
See below, p. 248.
Footnote 578:
See above, p. 234.
Footnote 579:
Ibid., p. 72.
Footnote 580:
Dodd, The Revision and Amendment of Constitutions; and Garner, in The American Political Science Review, February, 1907.
Footnote 581:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheaton, 316.
Footnote 582:
Batchellor, State Papers of New Hampshire, Vol. XXI, p. 165.
Footnote 583:
Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in 1788 (1856), p. 23.
Footnote 584:
Connecticut Courant, October 22, 1787.
Footnote 585:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. II, p. 61.
Footnote 586:
Delaware State Council Minutes, 1776–1792, pp. 1080–1082.
Footnote 587:
McMaster and Stone, Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, p. 72.
Footnote 588:
Votes and Proceedings of the Senate of Maryland, November Session, 1787, pp. 5 ff.
Footnote 589:
Above, p. 69. Blair, The Virginia Convention of 1788, Vol. I, pp. 56–57. Only freeholders could sit in the Convention.
Footnote 590:
North Carolina Assembly Journals, 1785–1789, p. 22.
Footnote 591:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. II, p. 83.
Footnote 592:
Libby, Geographical Distribution of the Vote on the Federal Constitution, p. 26, and note.
Footnote 593:
Article cited below, p. 243.
Footnote 594:
McKinley, Suffrage Franchise in the English Colonies, p. 420.
Footnote 595:
Dr. J. F. Jameson, “Did the Fathers Vote,” New England Magazine, January, 1890.
Footnote 596:
A detailed statement of the vote in many Connecticut towns on the members of the state convention could doubtless be compiled after great labor from the local records described in the report on the public archives of Connecticut, Report of the American Historical Association for 1906, Vol. II.
Footnote 597:
Harding, The Federal Constitution in Massachusetts, p. 55, note 3. The Connecticut Courant gives the number as 763, December 17, 1787.
Footnote 608:
The Journal for June 5 reports the Anti-Federalist ticket carried in Washington County by a vote of two to one.
Footnote 609:
See below, p. 270.
Footnote 610:
See a forthcoming dissertation on this subject by Wm. Feigenbaum. There was a threat of secession on the part of some New York City interests in case the Constitution was defeated. Weight was given to this threat by the news of the ratification from New Hampshire and Virginia. The possibility of retaining New York as the seat of the new Government was used by Jay, Hamilton, and Duane as an argument in favor of ratification. James Madison, Writings, Vol. I, p. 405.
Footnote 611:
McMaster and Stone, op. cit., p. 460.
Footnote 612:
Scharf and Wescott, History of Philadelphia, Vol. I, p. 447.
Footnote 613:
Hartford Courant, April 28, 1788.
Footnote 614:
American Historical Review, Vol. V, p. 221.
Footnote 615:
“Appius,” To the Citizens of South Carolina (1794). Library of Congress, Duane Pamphlets, Vol. 83.
Footnote 616:
By a careful study of local geography and the distribution of representation this could be accurately figured out.
Footnote 617:
“The First Elections under the Constitution,” Iowa Journal of History and Politics, Vol. II, pp. 3 ff.
Footnote 618:
It will be recalled that the Constitution was put into effect without either North Carolina or Rhode Island.
Footnote 619:
See above, p. 248.
Footnote 620:
See below, p. 299.
Footnote 621:
Libby, op. cit., pp. 50 ff.
Footnote 622:
Above, Chapter V.
Footnote 623:
Massachusetts and the Federal Constitution (Harvard Studies).
Footnote 624:
Sectionalism in Virginia.
Footnote 625:
Libby, op. cit., pp. 7–8.
Footnote 626:
Ibid., p. 11.
Footnote 627:
Data given here are from State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 442. It should be remembered that the figures would have been relatively different in 1787 on account of the union of Vermont with New Hampshire, but they are doubtless roughly correct.
Footnote 628:
Some painstaking research in the Treasury Department would produce valuable data toward the solution of this problem.
Footnote 629:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 442 (public funds included. See p. 419).
Footnote 630:
See above for the table, p. 36.
Footnote 631:
Ms. Treasury Department: New Hampshire Loan Office Books.
Footnote 632:
Libby, op. cit., p. 12.
Footnote 633:
The Federal Constitution in Massachusetts, p. 75.
Footnote 634:
As to the opposition in Maine, see General Knox’s view, below, p. 301.
Footnote 635:
The Federal Constitution in Massachusetts, pp. 63–66.
Footnote 636:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, pp. 451. Of course some changes in distribution may have occurred between 1789 and 1792, but this may be taken as approximately correct.
Footnote 637:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 443; Libby, op. cit., p. 107 for the vote.
Footnote 638:
Libby, op. cit., for vote, p. 107; State Papers: Finance, Vol. I. pp. 450 and 449 for taxes lists.
Footnote 639:
The full significance of the Worcester vote and property lists would involve an analysis of the distribution of each among the towns.
Footnote 640:
American Antiquarian Society Proceedings (1911), p. 65.
Footnote 641:
Ms. Treasury Department: Index to the Three Per Cents (Mass.). Gore, Dawes, and Phillips appear on the New Hampshire Journals and other Massachusetts Records.
Footnote 642:
The Index shows several holders by the name of Davis: Jonathan, James, Aaron, Susanna, John, Nathl., Joseph, Moses, Thomas, Saml., Wendell, and John G. Whether they were relatives of Caleb is not apparent. Leonard and Nathl. Jarvis also appear on the Book. Also Mary and Belcher Hancock.
Footnote 643:
All of these men except Wales and Warren appear on the Index to the Three Per Cents (Mass.). Wales and Warren appear on the books as holders of old certificates (Loan Office Certificates, 1779–1788, Mass.); and it does not appear when or how they disposed of their holdings.
Footnote 644:
See above, p. 75, note 3.
Footnote 645:
On September 3, 1787, the Connecticut Courant in a letter from Philadelphia (Aug. 24) says: “One of the first objects with the national government to be elected under the new constitution, it is said, will be to provide funds for the payment of the national debt, and thereby restore the credit of the United States, which has been so much impaired by the individual states. Every holder of a public security of any kind is, therefore, deeply interested in the cordial reception and speedy establishment of a vigorous continental government.”
Footnote 646:
Libby, op. cit., p. 14.
Footnote 647:
Ibid., p. 113.
Footnote 648:
Towns not represented or not voting in the convention are counted against the Constitution.
Footnote 649:
The assumed debt is taken because the Ledgers of that debt are in excellent shape and apparently complete. They do not contain, however, half of the security holders in that state. Several of the towns that had no assumed debt-holders were represented in the convention by holders of other paper. See table, p. 267.
Footnote 650:
See above, p. 15.
Footnote 651:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 423.
Footnote 652:
The sources for the information as to these securities are in the Treasury Department: Connecticut Loan Office, 1781–1783 (Register of Certificates); Connecticut Loan Office, Ledger B, Assumed Debt; Ledger C, 1790–1796; Ledger A, 1790–1797; Loan Office Certificates of 1779, etc.
Footnote 653:
No doubt a study of local economic interests in Connecticut would yield highly important data. See, for example, the early capitalist enterprises connected with the navigation of the Connecticut River. Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, 1903–1904, p. 404. Such local histories as E. D. Larned, A History of Windham County, contain veritable mines of information on the economic interests of men prominent in local politics.
Footnote 654:
Libby, op. cit., p. 18. Libby here takes the vote in the New York convention, but that did not precisely represent the popular vote. Above, p. 244.
Footnote 655:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 425.
Footnote 656:
Libby, op. cit., p. 59.
Footnote 657:
Those marked “C 6”, Ms. Treasury Department: New York, 6% Funds, 1790; “N. Y. 3” ibid., 3% Funds; “R,” New York Loan Office Receipts, Ms. Division, Library of Congress. Melancton Smith appears on the Ledgers of the Connecticut Loan Office; and N. Y. Loan Office, 1791, folio 138, for $10,000 worth of sixes and threes.
Footnote 658:
See above, p. 107.
Footnote 659:
Not present on final vote, but see Elliot, Debates, Vol. II, p. 411.
Footnote 660:
Libby, op. cit., pp. 60–61. Writing on October 14, 1787, Madison said “I do not learn that any opposition is likely to be made [to the ratification] in New Jersey,” Writings of James Madison, Vol. I, p. 342.
Footnote 661:
These records are drawn principally from incomplete lists of early certificates issued, or from some later funding books in the Treasury Department. The real weight of securities in the New Jersey convention must remain problematical, at least, for the present. The amounts set down to the names above recorded are for the most part insignificant—a few hundred or thousand dollars at the most, and often smaller. The point, it may be repeated, is not the amount but the practical information derived from holding even one certificate of the nominal value of $10.
Footnote 662:
Dr. Jameson says of the records of the Delaware convention: “Neither journal nor debates, has, I believe, ever been published,” American Historical Association Report (1902), Vol. I, p. 165.
Footnote 663:
Libby, op. cit., pp. 26 ff.
Footnote 664:
The Massachusetts Gazette, on October 19, 1787, prints a letter from Philadelphia (dated October 5) in which the activities of speculators in public securities are fully set forth: “Since the grand federal convention has opened the budget and published their scheme of government, all goes well here. Continental loan office certificates and all such securities have risen twenty-five per cent. Even the old emission which has long lain dormant begins to show its head. Last week many thousand pounds’ worth of it were bought up. Moneyed men have their agents employed to buy up all the continental securities they can—foreseeing the rapid rise of our funds. Such men as have the cash to spare will certainly make large fortunes.... We send our factors to the distant towns who know nothing of the rise and buy them cheap; for there is no buying them on reasonable terms in Philadelphia, as the wealthy men are purchasing them to lay up. Thus we go on—pray how is it with you?”
Footnote 665:
Ms. Treasury Department: “I,” Index to Funded 6 C; “JA,” Journal A, 1790–1791 (sixes and threes); “JB,” Journal B; “R,” Register Loan Office Certificates, 1788; “77,” Register Certificates of 1777; “3 C,” Ledger C, 3% Stock; “LT,” Treasury Ledger; “M,” Miscellaneous.
Footnote 666:
Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution. It will be noted that there were at least seven members of the Order of Cincinnati in the convention, all of whom were in favor of the Constitution.
Footnote 667:
Libby, op. cit., p. 66.
Footnote 668:
Letter, quoted in Libby, op. cit., p. 65.
Footnote 669:
Sectionalism in Virginia, pp. 6–9; p. 58.
Footnote 670:
Ambler, op. cit., pp. 8, 59.
Footnote 671:
Ibid., pp. 15–16.
Footnote 672:
Ambler, op. cit., pp. 48–52.
Footnote 673:
Henry not only refused to attend but opposed the adoption of the Constitution with all his might.
Footnote 674:
Ibid., p. 36.
Footnote 675:
Ambler, op. cit., pp. 53 ff.
Footnote 676:
For an explanation of the Federalist complexion of this region see Ambler’s explanation, Sectionalism in Virginia, p. 16.
Footnote 677:
Libby, op. cit., pp. 34–35.
Footnote 678:
Voted against ratification.
Footnote 679:
This is evident from the records in the Treasury Department.
Footnote 680:
Libby, op. cit., pp. 38 ff.
Footnote 681:
Ibid., p. 42–43.
Footnote 682:
“Appius,” To the Citizens of South Carolina (1794), Library of Congress, Duane Pamphlets, Vol. 83.
Footnote 683:
See above, p. 248.
Footnote 684:
State Papers: Finance, Vol. I, p. 462. In 1783 an attempt to establish a bank with $100,000 capital was made in Charleston, S.C., but it failed. “Soon after the adoption of the funding system, three banks were established in Charleston whose capitals in the whole amounted to twenty times the sum proposed in 1783.” D. Ramsay, History of South Carolina (1858 ed.), Vol. II, p. 106.
Footnote 685:
Ms. Treasury Department: South Carolina Loan Office Ledger, consult Index. No general search was made for other names.
Footnote 686:
On the subject of ratification in Georgia, Dr. Jameson says: “Nothing of either journal or debates is known to have been printed, unless in some contemporary newspaper outside the state; the Georgia newspapers seem to have nothing of the sort.” American Historical Association Report (1902), Vol. I, p. 167.
Footnote 687:
This danger may have had some influence in the concessions made by the Georgia delegates in the Convention for they were kept informed of the Indian troubles in the summer of 1787. Force Transcripts, Georgia Records, 1782–1789: Library of Congress.
Footnote 688:
Some holders of public securities are found among the opponents of the Constitution, but they are not numerous.
Footnote 689:
Writings, Vol. I, p. 423.
Footnote 690:
“Address to the Freemen of America,” The American Museum for June, 1787. Vol. I, p. 494.
Footnote 691:
New Hampshire Spy, November 30, 1787.
Footnote 692:
American Museum, July, 1788, Vol. IV, p. 85.
Footnote 693:
Above, p. 156.
Footnote 694:
McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheaton, 316; below, p. 299.
Footnote 695:
Vol. II (1850 ed.), p. 99 ff.
Footnote 696:
Farrand, Records, Vol. III, p. 232. Speaking of New Hampshire, Madison says, “The opposition [to the Constitution], I understand, is composed precisely of the same description of characters with that of Massachusetts and stands contrasted to all the wealth, abilities, and respectability of the State.” Writings, Vol. I, p. 383.
Footnote 697:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. IV, p. 442.
Footnote 698:
Report of the Manuscripts Commission of the American Historical Association, December 20, 1896, p. 754. A writer in the Chronicle of Freedom (reprinted in the Massachusetts Centinel, October, 27, 1787) complains of the dangers to the freedom of the press from the new Constitution and continues: “One thing, however, is calculated to alarm our fears on this head;—I mean the fashionable language which now prevails so much and is so frequent in the mouths of some who formerly held very different opinions;—That common people have no business to trouble themselves about government.” The Massachusetts Centinel (November 24, 1787) declares it to be “a notorious fact that three of the principle enemies of the proposed constitution were heart and hand with the insurgents last winter.”
Footnote 699:
Life and Letters, Vol. I, pp. 314 ff.
Footnote 700:
Harding, The Federal Constitution in Massachusetts, pp. 123–124.
Footnote 701:
Ford, Essays on the Constitution, p. 139.
Footnote 702:
Ford, Essays on the Constitution, pp. 144 ff.
Footnote 703:
Libby, op. cit., p. 58.
Footnote 704:
Connecticut Courant, May 21, 1787.
Footnote 705:
See above, p. 156.
Footnote 706:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. IV, p. 288. On the antagonism in New York see some clues afforded in an article in The Magazine of American History, April, 1893, pp. 326 ff.
Footnote 707:
Dickinson’s Fabius letters were printed after the ratification by Delaware and were directed to the “general public” rather than fellow-citizens in that commonwealth. Among the opponents to the Constitution, he put “men without principles or fortunes who think they may have a chance to mend their circumstances with impunity under a weak government.” Ford, Pamphlets on the Constitution, p. 165.
Footnote 708:
See Harding, “Party struggles over the First Pennsylvania Constitution,” American Historical Association Report (1894).
Footnote 709:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. IV, p. 305.
Footnote 710:
Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 339.
Footnote 711:
Ibid., Vol. IV, p. 358.
Footnote 712:
McMaster and Stone, op. cit., p. 73.
Footnote 713:
Ibid., p. 567.
Footnote 714:
Ibid., p. 367.
Footnote 715:
McMaster and Stone, op. cit., pp. 568–569.
Footnote 716:
Ibid., pp. 569–570.
Footnote 717:
Connecticut Courant, Oct. 1, 1787.
Footnote 718:
See the valuable articles on “Maryland’s Adoption of the Constitution,” by Dr. Steiner in the American Historical Review, Vol. V.
Footnote 719:
Ford, Pamphlets on the Constitution, p. 254.
Footnote 720:
See above, p. 205.
Footnote 721:
Maryland Journal, March 21, 1788.
Footnote 722:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. IV, p. 398. For the economics of this, see above, p. 30.
Footnote 723:
P. 295.
Footnote 724:
“It is currently reported,” says the New Hampshire Spy, on December 7, 1787, “that there are only two men in Virginia who are not in debt, to be found among the enemies to the federal constitution. Debtors, speculators in papers, and states demagogues act consistently in opposing it.”
Footnote 725:
Documentary History of the Constitution, Vol. IV, p. 584.
Footnote 726:
Ibid., p. 577.
Footnote 727:
Elliot, Debates, Vol. III, p. 592. See W. C. Ford, “The Federal Constitution in Virginia,” in the Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society for October, 1903.
Footnote 728:
Elliot, Debates, Vol. IV, p. 159.
Footnote 729:
Elliot, Debates, Vol. IV, p. 90.
Footnote 730:
McRee, Life and Correspondence of James Iredell, Vol. II, pp. 216, 219.
Footnote 731:
McRee, op. cit., Vol. II, p. 164 note.
Footnote 732:
See W. A. Schaper, “Sectionalism in South Carolina,” American Historical Association Report (1900), Vol. I.
Footnote 733:
Summary by T. Ford, The Constitutionalist (1794), p. 21.
Footnote 734:
Ford, op. cit., pp. 21–22.
Footnote 735:
Op. cit., p. 13.
Footnote 736:
Ford, Pamphlets on the Constitution, p. 379. On May 24, 1788, after the Constitution had been approved in South Carolina, General Pinckney wrote to Rufus King, saying, “The Anti-Federalists had been most mischievously industrious in prejudicing the minds of our citizens against the Constitution. Pamphlets, speeches, & Protests from the disaffected in Pennsylvania were circulated throughout the state, particularly in the back country.” King, Life and Correspondence, Vol. I, p. 329.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
1. Silently corrected obvious typographical errors and variations in spelling. 2. Retained archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as printed. 3. Enclosed italics font in underscores.
An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States · The Wunder Library — complete classics, free to read, with narration.