USA > North Carolina > History of North Carolina: The Federal Period 1783-1860, Volume II > Part 2
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33
No less vital than the problems of the currency and the loyalists was that of the western lands. Beyond the moun- tains lay a vast area, at present the State of Tennessee. Its colonization began with the Watauga Settlement just prior to the Revolution, and its expansion had continued during the war. From the original Washington County, Sullivan was formed in 1779 and Greene in 1783, while on the distant Cumberland Nashboro was founded in 1780 and the County of Davidson was organized in 1783. At the end of the war the population west of the mountains was approximately 25,000. Between the western settlements, notably those of the Watau- ga region, and the older section of the state east of the moun- tains, there was considerable antipathy. Its earliest evidence
" I N. C. Repts., 5.
8 McRee, II, 51.
12
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
is seen in the Watauga Association; it relaxed during the stress of war, but with the return of peace the tension was renewed and civil war was barely averted. The immediate causes of the strained relations were three; the land policy of North Carolina, the need of Congress for new financial resources, and the ambition of the Watauga people for state- hood.
The financial policy of North Carolina during the Revolu- tion was characterized by a reliance, as far as possible, on paper money. This, together with the collapse of the re- striction on land grants, imposed by the British government, gave rise to a fever of speculation. County land offices were opened in 1777, and for three years, until paper money was greatly depreciated, land was rapidly entered. Then, in 1780, land grants were offered as inducements to military service, and a military reservation was created south of the Virginia line and east of the Tennessee River, in which each soldier was to have 200 acres, increased to 640 in 1781, and one prime slave. In 1783 all public land, except that reserved to Indians and the military reservation, was made security for the new state currency of that year at the rate of £10 for each 100 acres. Thus the policy of the state was to use va- cant land as bounty to soldiers and to redeem paper money.
In the meantime the land problem became involved with continental affairs. A movement among the states to cede their western lands to Congress was proposed by Maryland. North Carolina was not in the vanguard of those responding, for the land policy above outlined seemed to preclude part- ing with any territory. But in 1780, and again in 1783, Congress recommended the cession of all transmontane lands in the interest of the national debt. In fact national finances were in even worse plight than those of the states. The experiment of meeting expenses by making requisition on the states had proved a failure. North Carolina was notori- ously delinquent, making no payment after 1780. By 1784 considerable sentiment had developed in favor of ceding the western lands for the public obligations. Such a policy seemed advantageous for local as well as continental reasons. With the return of peace bounties ceased; moreover there
13
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
was a movement to levy a continental land tax and to appor- tion requisitions according to population. Evidently the less territory, the less would be North Carolina's portion in meet- ing future expenditures. In the light of these facts the ces- sion of western land was advisable, especially if the land ceded should pass to the credit of the state's accounts with the Continental Congress. Therefore by an act of cession passed in April, 1784, the transmontane lands were granted to Congress with the following restrictions; that neither the lands nor the inhabitants should in the future be counted in estimating North Carolina's share of the expenses in the Revolution, that the bounties provided for officers and sol- diers should be protected, that the territory granted should be considered a common fund for the benefit of the states, that one or more new states should be created out of it, and that if Congress should not accept the cession, the lands should revert to the state. A supplementary statute also provided that until the United States accepted the cession, the sov- ereignty of North Carolina should remain unimpaired. Evi- dently self-interest as well as regard for the national welfare prompted the cession of western lands; a reduction of the state's continental obligation in the future, prospective benefits to be shared with the other states, and the protection of military bounties offered. Yet these terms seemed to some too liberal, and a protest was filed, signed by William R. Davie and thirty-six others. Their dissent was based on the need of liquidating the state debt with the western lands, the fact that North Carolina's quota of the continental debt was really unknown, and that full credit had not been given the state by the continental authorities for all military services rendered.
The act of cession did not reach Philadelphia in time for acceptance, for Congress and the legislature adjourned on the same day, June 3rd. In July Hugh Williamson, member of the North Carolina delegation in Congress, expressed to Governor Martin his disapproval of the cession. The burden of his criticism was sectional injustice in adjusting conti- nental accounts. North Carolina had not been given credit for aid to South Carolina and Virginia and for expeditions
14
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
against the Indians, whereas New Hampshire and Pennsyl- vania had obtained credit for militia service, and other states were demanding similar credit; Congress had also taken no step to quiet the Southern Indians; Massachusetts had filed claims for part of the territory ceded by Virginia, and Geor- gia had so far made no cession of territory; Rhode Island had refused to ratify the proposed five per cent duty on imports. He therefore recommended that North Carolina reconsider the act of cession and hold the western lands until these matters could be adjusted. "If we should immedi- ately complete the cession," he said, "we shall give up the power of making advantageous terms and shall lose the argu- ment which shall bring others to adopt federal measures." Yet he realized that an ultimate cession of western land was imperative. "On the other hand, should we sell out what remains of this territory to the western inhabitants what- ever inconveniences they may suffer, they will lose the pros- pect of becoming a separate state; the quota of our State will be doubled, though we shall hardly have the means of paying half of our present quota. In that case we shall give up the means of making terms or the power of adopting better measures if better should present. themselves. The situation is critical. Perhaps it is most consistent with prudence to make a pause. Whatever shall finally appear to be for the honor and true interest of the state may be done twelve months hence as well as now. But we may do wrong things which may not be undone."9 The upshot was that at the next session of the legislature, in October, 1784, the act of cession was repealed.
In the meantime discontent with the government of North Carolina was brooding beyond the mountains. It was claimed that the state had not paid the Indians for land they had vacated, thus endangering peace; that courts were not regu- larly held or the law properly enforced; and that the system of taxation was unjust, for it made no discrimination between the value of lands on the frontier and those near the centers of trade. There was also a social cleavage, a feeling of su-
9 State Records, XVII, 94.
15
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
periority toward the frontier on the part of the older counties. One of the members of the legislature in discussing the act of cession remarked that the "Inhabitants of the western country are the offscourings of the earth, fugitives from jus- tice, and we will be rid of them at any rate." Consequently
JOHN SEVIER
the news of the cession was received with joy, especially among the people of the Watauga region. Independence from North Carolina seemed assured and statehood naturally in order. A committee consisting of two from each of the cap- tains' districts proposed a convention to meet at Jonesboro. Elections were held in all the transmontane counties except Davidson, and the convention met on August 23, 1784. The presiding officer was John Sevier, and Landon Carter was
16
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
secretary. It was decided to petition Congress to accept the North Carolina cession, and by a vote of 28 to 15 to per- fect a state organization. A second convention was called to frame a constitution. When it met in November, the North Carolina legislature had repealed the act of cession, and to conciliate the westerners had created for them a new judicial district, called the District of Washington, and also a brigadier-generalship of militia for that region. To the latter office John Sevier was appointed. Thus the opposi- tion to statehood, apparent in the first convention, became stronger in the second, which consequently broke up in dis- order. In the elections for a third convention Sevier himself opposed the movement for independence. However, the con- vention met on December 14, 1784, and proceeded to form a constitution. Even among the advocates of statehood there was division. One faction, led by Rev. Samuel Hunter, pro- posed a constitution which had certain divergencies from that of North Carolina. Among these were universal suf- frage, educational and moral qualifications for office holders, popular election of governor and county officers, limitation on imprisonment for debt, exclusion of ministers, lawyers, and doctors from office, and a single house of legislature. The other faction, led by Sevier, favored a close adherence to the constitution of North Carolina, and the name Franklin instead of Frankland for the new state; it proved to have a small majority. Drafts of each constitution were submitted to the people for approval, and a fourth convention, which met in November, 1785, adopted the more conservative docu- ment and also the name Franklin. In the meantime elections for the legislature were held in March, 1785. That body, when it convened, elected Sevier governor, appointed county officers, created new counties, incorporated Martin Academy, and fixed salaries in commodities.
These activities amounted to defiance of North Carolina, for not only had the sovereignty of the state been specified to last until Congress should accept the cession, but the act of cession itself had been repealed. The future of Franklin depended therefore on the question of the attitude of Con-
17
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
gress, the co-operation of other frontier communities, and the policy of the North Carolina authorities.
One of the first acts of the Franklin legislature was to . appoint William Cocke delegate to the Continental Congress to lay before that body the affairs of the nascent state. As the act of cession had been repealed, Congress could do nothing but advise North Carolina to reconsider its action. Later Cocke appealed to Benjamin Franklin; his advice was not to continue in the policy of separation. However hope of federal action revived at the time of the Federal Conven- tion. The argument then advanced was that, as the act of cession gave Congress twelve months to consider or reject the offer, the repeal was illegal, and the way was open for federal intervention. A direct bid for such action was prob- ably made by reserving the proceeds from Indian land sales for the payment of Franklin's quota of the federal debt; but the matter was not formally presented for the consideration of the convention.
The Franklin authorities also sought the co-operation of neighboring frontier settlements. Chief of these was Wash- ington County, Virginia. There grievances existed against the Virginia government. Col. Arthur Campbell, justice of the peace and county lieutenant, declared the people would take up arms rather than submit to further unjust taxation. Two petitions were sent to Richmond, asking for the erec- tion of a new state whose boundaries might include Franklin. But the Virginia legislature had no sympathy for such a plan, and in 1785 declared that any attempt to form an inde- pendent government within the limits of the state would be considered high treason. The Franklinites, strange to say, also sought the co-operation of the Cherokee Indians. It was thrice reported in 1785 that negotiations were pending, look- ing to the incorporation of the Cherokees with the State of Franklin. The Indian negotiations were not fruitful, for land treaties were not agreed to by all the Cherokee chiefs. In the desire for expansion an expedition was sent to Muscle Shoals to make occupation under titles from Georgia. The hostility of the Creeks was thus aroused, and negotiations were opened with Georgia for an Indian war. However, Con- Vol. II-2
18
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
gress intervened, appointing three commissioners, one from South Carolina, one from Georgia, and one from North Caro- lina, to pacify the redmen, so checking the possibility of ex- pansion by the State of Franklin. Interest was also mani- fested in the greatest of all western problems, the naviga- tion of the Mississippi. According to a report, two delegates were sent to a convention of western settlers in the Kentucky district to consider the Mississippi question. Another report declared that a legion of 150 men was authorized to march against the Spanish. Evidently, if the colonists of the Mis- sissippi valley should take such matters in their own hands, a new confederacy might result; by co-operation, Franklin might secure membership in it; but that prospect did not mature.
Thus the Franklinites had to meet their most pressing problem, the attitude of the State of North Carolina, alone. A clause in the Constitution of 1776 looked forward to the establishment of two or more states west of the mountains. This constitutional provision, the necessity of ultimate ces- sion as outlined by Williamson, the distance of Franklin from the older sections of the state, together with the general con- fusion of the times, led to a policy of conciliation as well as of firmness. Alexander Martin, governor during the develop- ment until April, 1785, sent a special messenger to inform Sevier of the repeal of the act of cession. The legislature of Franklin replied: "We are induced to think that North Caro- lina will not blame us for endeavoring to promote our own interest and happiness, while we do not attempt to abridge hers, and appeal to the impartial world to determine whether we have deserted North Carolina or North Carolina deserted us. '' 10 Martin then issued a proclamation calling on the people to return to their allegiance, declaring that their grievances were removed by the court law and the militia district, and that resistance might lead to civil war. More conciliatory was Governor Caswell, who assumed office in April, 1785. Writing to Sevier, he declared he had not seen Martin's proclamation, indicated that the payment to the In-
10 S. R., XXII, 637.
19
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
dians was ready to be delivered, and suggested that he himself might soon visit the west. He also sent commissions for North Carolina officers, and soon there were two sets of officials, those exercising authority under North Carolina and those under Franklin. The legislature of North Carolina in Janu- ary, 1787, was also conciliatory, offering pardon and oblivion to all who would return to allegiance and remitting taxes from the end of 1784 to that time. Sevier also became moderate. In October, 1786, he declared that Franklin did not desire any terms but such as were consistent with the honor and interest of both parties, and in March, 1787, he made an agreement with Evan Shelby, his successor as brigadier of militia, for cooperation in criminal matters and the suspension of all civil suits except wills and deeds, and that the people should pay taxes to either North Carolina or the State of Franklin.
However the Franklin legislature was more radical; it im- posed fine and imprisonment on any who accepted commis- sions from North Carolina, opened a land office, and offered bounties to all who would enlist in the militia and resist the administration of the mother state. " Where the legislature led, Sevier followed. In strong contrast to his conservative attitude, he now wrote Governor Caswell: "We shall con- tinue to act independent and would rather suffer death, in all its various and frightful shapes, than to conform to any- thing that is disgraceful." Bitterness and retaliation de- veloped. As Sevier had originally opposed separation and then drifted with the movement, John Tipton, after the re- peal of the act of cession, returned to his allegiance to North Carolina. These two now became the leaders of rival fac- tions in Franklin. In August, 1787, Tipton with fifty men at- tempted to seize the Franklin court records in Washington County, but found himself opposed by 200 Franklinites. From time to time conflicts of minor importance occurred. Shelby asked Governor Caswell for 1,000 troops in 1787. Again the governor was conciliatory. In an address he appealed to the sober judgment of the people, pointed out the imminent dan- ger of an Indian war, such a war having actually broken out in Davidson County in 1786, and held out hopes of some action by the North Carolina legislature. In fact at the suc-
20
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
ceeding session of the legislature representatives from the original Watauga counties appeared and were given seats, while the Franklin legislature also sent delegates to present claims for separation. The legislature extended the act of oblivion, and by March, 1788, the State of Franklin col- lapsed, for Sevier's term then expired and no session of the Franklin legislature met to elect a successor. Sevier him- self was chosen a member of the North Carolina legislature in 1789, and took his seat after a special act pardoning him had been adopted.
CHAPTER II
FEDERAL RELATIONS, 1783-1787
STATE RIGHTS AND NATIONALIZATION-THE FEDERAL CONVEN- TION AND THE RATIFICATION OF THE CONSTITUTION
The attitude of North Carolina toward continental author- ity reflected motives of self-interest and patriotic devotion. Liberal military support was given the Revolution, but state authority was maintained over all troops, even regiments in the continental line, often to the extent of conflicting with Congress. Delinquent in meeting its quota of national ex- pense, generous response was made to recommendations for financial reform. In 1781 Congress was granted authority to levy a five per cent impost on foreign goods, and in 1782 the charter of the Bank of North America was validated. How- ever, with the last year of the war the condition of federal finances became more serious. The continental currency had depreciated, the states were hopelessly in arrears with their requisitions, and radical reform or bankruptcy were inevitable alternatives. Under the advice and leadership of Robert Morris, Congress in the spring of 1783 proposed certain amendments to the Articles of Confederation. In its policy toward these, North Carolina also displayed an interesting balance of self-interest and altruism.
The first of the proposed amendments made population, five slaves counting as three whites, the basis of apportioning requisitions among the states. Now land granted or sur- veyed had been made the basis of apportionment in the Arti- cles of Confederation through the unanimous votes of the Southern delegates in Congress, for it was believed that a land basis, restricted to surveyed or improved land, would impose the least burden on the South. By 1783 opinion was
21
-- HUGH
AMSON ~
WILLIAM
BLOUNT-
.
ALEXAN
RTIN!
IFR
MA
1
RICH
RD
DOBBS SPAIGHT
DAVIE
NORTH CAROLINA DELEGATES TO THE CONVENTION OF 1787
23
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
changing. North Carolina had granted thousands of acres as bounties to soldiers; speculation was rife, land was being granted and surveyed more rapidly than it was being im- proved and made productive. Hence arose a feeling that population, five slaves counting as three whites, would incur less requisition than land. Hugh Williamson and William Blount, delegates of North Carolina in Congress, favored the change. The second recommendation was that the continental authorities be allowed to levy a specific duty on imports for twenty-five years. To this the North Carolina delegates of- fered no opposition, since the foreign commerce of the state was comparatively insignificant, and whatever burden in- volved would therefore be borne by other states. The third recommendation, however, was far more drastic. It was nothing less than a direct land and poll tax, the levy on land to be according to the number of acres, irrespective of qual- ity. Williamson and Blount saw in this a hardship, but their interest was overshadowed by the fourth recommendation, the cession to Congress of all land west of the mountains. This they approved only on condition that North Carolina receive full credit for all services in the Revolution and that any state organized out of the ceded territory should assume its quota of the continental debt.
These recommendations were submitted to the legislature in the spring of 1784. They had the endorsement of William- son and Spaight and also of Governor Martin. Approved by a legislative committee, they were adopted without protest, except the cession of western lands. Moreover, another rec- ommendation, forwarded after these, was readily endorsed; that Congress should have the right to prohibit the importa- tion of foreign goods in any ships except those owned by citizens of the United States, a measure aimed at the re- strictive commercial policy of England. None of these meas- ures went into operation, for those relating to revenue and navigation were not approved by all the states, and the cession of western lands was repealed by the next legisla- ture. However North Carolina's record in the movement to revise the Articles of Confederation was unsurpassed; only one other state, Delaware, approved all the recommendations
24
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
of Congress. Moreover in 1785, after the recommendation for the control of navigation had failed of general approval, a local attainment of its ends was sought by levying five shillings per ton on every vessel of a nation, on entering a North Carolina port, which did not have a commercial treaty with the United States, and a duty of twenty per cent above the regular schedule on its cargo, except goods manufactured in the United States from domestic raw material.
The legislation of 1784 marks the high tide of interest in continental affairs. Thereafter less attention was given to Congress; frequently the state had been unrepresented in its deliberations, but the absence of delegates in 1785 and 1786 became notorious. For this, financial conditions were to a large extent responsible. The salaries of Congressmen were small, the depreciation of the state currency made them almost worthless outside of North Carolina, the treasury was so low that salaries could not always be paid, and in some instances the transportation of tobacco and other products north was the only means by which the North Carolina dele- gates could meet their expenses. The custom of appointing five delegates to serve in rotation, adopted in 1785, also proved a failure. Yet the sense of responsibility for conti- nental affairs only waned and did not die, for in 1787 on the recommendation of Congress the Treaty of Peace was enacted into the law of North Carolina.
In the meantime a new movement to revise the Articles of Confederation was inaugurated. In July, 1786, Governor Caswell and the Council of State appointed five commission- ers to attend the Trade Convention at Annapolis. Of these only one, Hugh Williamson, made an effort to go, and he arrived the day the convention adjourned. Then came the call for the Federal Convention to meet in Philadelphia for the purpose of remedying the defects in the Articles of Con- federation. The legislature which met in November, 1786, was much concerned with the investigation of the judiciary, frauds in the army accounts, and the affairs of the State of Franklin. Largely through the efforts of James Iredell, the convention movement was approved. Five delegates were elected, of whom three, Willie Jones, Alexander Martin, and
25
HISTORY OF NORTH CAROLINA
Governor Caswell, were said to oppose, and two, Davie and Richard Dobbs Spaight, to favor, a revision of the Articles of Confederation. Jones and Caswell declined to serve, and acting under the law approving the convention, Caswell ap- pointed in their places Hugh Williamson and William Blount. As these two favored the movement for revision, the char- acter of the delegation was changed, all except Martin being in sympathy with the desire to amend the Articles.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.