USA > New York > A short history of New York State > Part 13
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 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75
It was fitting that a thirteen-gun salute should mark the departure of the British from New York State. The Revolution was a united effort on the part of all thirteen colonies. Soldiers of the Continental Army who came from all states fought and died on New York soil, and the Conti- nental Congress furnished a considerable quantity of money and supplies for the defense of New York. New Yorkers fought outside the boundaries of their native state and gave strong support to the Continental Congress. On February 6, 1778, New York became the second state to approve the Articles of Confederation.
No other state suffered more for the cause of independence than did New York. Its frontiers blazed constantly in guerilla warfare. Armies marched and countermarched through its principal river valleys, strewing death and destruction behind them. Nearly one-third of the engagements of the war were fought on New York soil. New York City, which con- trolled most of the commerce of the state, was continuously in enemy hands from 1776 until 1783. Two major fires destroyed many buildings in the great seaport. After British evacuation the population of the city fell to ten thousand, half of what it had been on the eve of revolution.
The recitation of these facts cannot bring home to the modern reader the grief of those who saw their loved ones slaughtered and their property destroyed. No real understanding can be conveyed of the suffering of those whose bodies were maimed in the conflict. Nor is it easy to sympa- thize with the thousands of Loyalists who were driven from their homes by the exigencies of war, often never to return. No history can adequately portray the cost of independence in terms of human suffering. The con- clusion of hostilities brought little respite. Roads, factories, farms, and business houses essential to the economy had been destroyed or damaged. Many of the old trade connections enjoyed by New York City had been lost. The currency was unstable and inflation stalked the land. Mistrust and hatred of the Loyalists who remained within the state ran high. New Yorkers who found their courage and resourcefulness heavily taxed during the Revolution faced equally serious problems at the war's end. Small wonder historians have termed the post-Revolutionary era in New York "the critical period."
Chapter 11
The Age of George Clinton, 1783-1800
Report says that you are very civil to the young and handsome of the sex that you flattered the old and ugly-and even em- braced the toothless and decrepit, in order to obtain votes.
-PHILIP SCHUYLER to William Cooper, 1792
SHORTLY after George Clinton won the first gubernatorial election held in the state of New York, Philip Schuyler wrote to John Jay that Clinton's "family and connections do not entitle him to so distinguished a predomi- nance; yet he is virtuous and loves his country, has abilities and is brave." Schuyler accurately reflected the sentiments of the old aristocratic families of New York, who believed that the reins of government ought to be in the hands of wealthy men of established families. Such persons, the argu- ment ran, not only were best qualified by reason of upbringing, but had an enormous personal stake in the welfare of the state and, therefore, could be trusted to fulfill their official duties energetically and effectively.
Although Governor Clinton did not belong to the topmost stratum of society, he was well-to-do and had both social and business contacts with the aristocracy. Among his friends and business partners was George Washington, to whom he loaned a considerable sum of money. Clinton was at ease in most social situations but showed a marked distaste for the ostentatious display of pomp and ceremony so dear to the hearts of the aristocrats.
In all probability the governor's love of simplicity and lack of family eminence were political assets. At any rate the excellent characteristics mentioned by Schuyler were to carry him seven times to the governorship and twice to the vice-presidency. From the time he first took over the governor's office in 1777 until the turn of the century, George Clinton exerted more influence on the politics of New York than any other indi- vidual. Circumstances and the astuteness of his opponents sometimes
119
120
A SHORT HISTORY OF NEW YORK STATE
defeated his efforts. Nevertheless, he won and retained a public con- fidence seldom matched in the history of the state.
A host of problems faced George Clinton in 1783 as he took the oath for his third term as governor. How severely should the Loyalists be treated? How could New York make good its claims to Vermont and settle its dispute with Massachusetts for control of the western half of the state? What policy should New York follow in selling its lands and in attacking the semifeudal land system? Should New York print more paper money, place tariffs on imports, and encourage banks? Did the law codes need revision? How far should New York go in co-operating with the other states? These were only a few of the difficult questions which con- fronted Clinton and the state legislature.
The Revolution brought striking and far-reaching social changes to New York, well beyond those experienced by most states. The legislature disestablished the Episcopal church and put all sects on an equal footing. The pattern of landholding became increasingly democratic as new tracts were opened up in the west and settled by freeholding farmers. The abolition of entail and primogeniture, under which vast estates passed exclusively to the first born, and the confiscation of Tory property helped to break up the aristocratic land system in eastern New York. Because of the property qualifications for the suffrage the spread of land ownership increased the number of voters. It also increased the number of self- employed and independent farmers, who eventually became a potent force for democratization. The revolutionary upheaval stimulated the movement for the abolition of slavery in New York as well as other states. The exodus of the Loyalists and the impoverishment of many old families as a result of war devastation and inflation tended to break up the rigidity of social lines by reducing the economic gulf between rich and poor. It is noteworthy that the two leading political figures, George Clinton and Alexander Hamilton, were "new men," not drawn from the colonial aristocracy.
The upsurge of democratic and humanitarian feeling also brought about reforms in the civil and criminal code. An act of 1784 provided that a jailed debtor could be released if the person or persons holding three-fourths of his debts petitioned for it, but not until the 1830's did the state abolish the practice of placing debtors in prison. Some progress was made in tempering the brutalities in the criminal code, which in 1780 listed no fewer than sixteen capital crimes, including forgery and house- breaking. Governor Clinton denounced the "sanguinary complexion of our criminal code" and called upon the legislature in 1794 to correct the situation. No action was taken until the first administration of John Jay, when the list of capital offenses was reduced to murder, treason, and robbing a church.
-
121
THE AGE OF GEORGE CLINTON
While the Revolution set democratic forces in motion, the triumph of independence brought no radical political changes. True, the guiding hand of the royal governor was gone, the legislature had more power, and it was easier to secure title to a small farm; but such changes were almost inevitable as the result of victory. Actually, New Yorkers had not fought for the new democratic principles but for the traditional rights of Englishmen. The idea of expanding these rights grew gradually over a long period of time. The Constitution of 1777 limited the franchise to twenty-pound freeholders or the renters of tenements worth forty shillings a year. It is estimated that fewer than one out of ten of the male in- habitants of New York City were eligible to vote for governor in 1790.
The treatment of the Loyalists became an important issue in state politics in the 1780's. Governor Clinton urged the passage of severe laws against the return of Tories and the recovery of their confiscated prop- erty. The Trespass Act of 1783 provided that a citizen might sue the oc- cupant of his property if it had been occupied while that property was behind British lines. Interestingly enough, the Mayor's Court of New York City voided the act on the ground that it violated the accepted principle of the law of nations in regard to the rights of occupation forces. By 1788 the legislature had lifted many of the restrictions im- posed upon the Loyalists and most of them had recovered their rights as citizens. The Tory element naturally threw its political support to the conservative faction led by Hamilton and the Schuyler and Livingston families.
Riotous outbreaks often marred the peace during the years following the Revolution. Fortunately, George Clinton was a man of action who moved quickly to maintain law and order. In 1787, when a rebellion of small farmers led by Daniel Shays, a veteran of Bunker Hill, threatened to spread from Massachusetts to New York, the governor called up three regiments and personally led the troops which restored tranquillity. Clinton had less success in establishing the authority of the New York government in the northeastern section of the state. The Province of New York as granted by the King in 1664 to the Duke of York had the Connecticut River as its eastern boundary. Later Connecticut and Mas- sachusetts by agreement with New York extended their borders to a line twenty miles east of the Hudson River.
Previous to 1741 New Hampshire had been under the jurisdiction of the governor of Massachusetts. In that year New Hampshire obtained a governor of its own in Benning Wentworth, who maintained that the western boundary of New Hampshire was similar to that of Mas- sachusetts and extended to within twenty miles of the Hudson River. Proceeding on this assumption, he began to grant titles to lands lying east of the Connecticut River. By 1764 there were 131 New Hampshire
122
A SHORT HISTORY OF NEW YORK STATE
townships in this region in which Wentworth and his friends laid aside millions of acres for themselves.
New York refused to honor the claims of New Hampshire and issued titles to land in the disputed area. When New Yorkers holding such titles tried to take possession, they met armed opposition. Their homes were burned; their cattle stolen; and their persons manhandled. Into this confused situation moved the Allen brothers-Heman, Ira, and Ethan-who formed a group known as the Onion River Company to buy up New Hampshire titles from discouraged holders at bargain prices. Obviously these landjobbers would reap a fortune if the New Hampshire titles could be made valid. The Allens organized an effective militia known as the "Green Mountain Boys" which successfully repelled the authority of New York. In 1777 a convention at Westminster proclaimed the independent state of Vermont and drew up a constitution.
Governor George Clinton refused to recognize Vermont, although in 1778 he did offer to confirm the titles of all inhabitants who would admit the jurisdiction of New York. This concession came ten years too late. Vermont under its resolute leaders continued its independent way, coining money, setting up post roads, establishing post offices, and, following the Revolution, negotiating treaties with British officials in Canada. Clinton did not try to coerce Vermont with armed force partly because other problems nearer at hand were far more pressing and partly because the New England states strongly supported the Yankee inhabitants of Vermont. Finally, New York wisely decided to accept the inevitable. In 1790 commissioners from the two states agreed that New York would recognize Vermont's independence and boundaries in return for which Vermont would pay New York $30,000 for land claims. On March 4, 1791, Vermont entered the Union as the fourteenth state.
Economic problems also disturbed New York politicians during the "critical period." A postwar boom disguised for a time the devastation and dislocation caused by war, but in 1785 hard times set in. Business was handicapped by lack of a sound and stable currency. Paper money issued by the state and the Continental Congress depreciated, fluc- tuated in value, and was counterfeited easily. To avoid such difficulties businessmen sought to use coins, usually British, French, or Spanish in origin. Pistareens, doubloons, half joes, and moidores are the pic- turesque names of only a few of the many coins in daily use. The farmers, troubled by heavy debts and low prices, advocated their tra- ditional solution-cheap paper money. Some shopkeepers who relied upon the trade of the farmers also urged the state to issue more paper money. In opposition, however, were most of the large merchants, the bankers, and large landholders. As creditors, they did not want to be
123
THE AGE OF GEORGE CLINTON
paid back in depreciated currency. As businessmen, they disliked a wildly fluctuating medium of exchange.
As the depression deepened, the clamor for paper money grew more intense. By 1786 the advocates of cheap money won control of the legislature and secured Governor George Clinton's somewhat grudging support. The legislature provided for £200,000 in bills of credit which were to be distributed to county loan offices where farmers could secure loans if they presented their mortgages as collateral. This modest measure helped stimulate business suffering from a scarcity of currency. New York's credit remained good, partly because Clinton's administration was honest, economical, and efficient, but also because ample revenues were secured from import duties and the sale of state lands.
In the 1780's New Yorkers held themselves to be citizens of New York and not citizens of the United States. Most of them regarded a strong centralized government as evil in principle and believed their rights and privileges could best be preserved by the state. After all, they had fought British rule largely because they opposed government from a distant capital. The long quarrel over the proposal to give Congress a 5-per-cent tariff on imports reveals the distrust of the central government. In 1783 Clinton forced the repeal of the impost which the state had granted to Congress during the emergency of war, and Congress' requests for the renewal of the right to collect a duty on goods imported to New York were sidetracked by the governor and the state legislature. In 1786, when Congress asked Clinton to call a special session of the legislature to reconsider its position on the impost, Clinton refused to do so on the ground that special sessions could only be called on "extraordinary occasions." Despite the attacks of Alexander Hamilton, Clinton's stand on this issue was strongly supported by. the legislature. As a result Hamilton threw his support behind the effort to strengthen the federal government.
Generally the states followed the practice of trade reciprocity, that is, all American goods were exempt from the payment of state imposts, and in 1784 New York provided that all products grown or manufactured in the United States were free from duty charges. The following year the state legislature placed a tax on all imports from outside the federal union which entered by way of neighboring states, and later it placed clearance fees on ships sailing to or from New Jersey and Connecticut. These imposts were resented by New York's sister states, but a much sharper criticism was directed at the New York tariff on imports from outside the union. Since many imported goods were shipped through New York on their way to other states and since merchants had to add the duty charge to the price of the products, consumers ultimately were forced to pay the New York tariff fee even though they resided in
124
A SHORT HISTORY OF NEW YORK STATE
another state. Naturally, retaliatory measures were taken by sister states. Congress under the Articles of Confederation was powerless to put an end to the bickering over interstate trade and was unable to secure favorable commercial treaties with foreign nations.
In the face of these perplexing difficulties, the Virginia legislature called for a convention of states to be held at Annapolis in September 1786. Delegates from New York and four other states attended the convention, which adopted a report written by Alexander Hamilton pointing out the conspicuous defects in the Articles of Confederation and suggesting that a new convention be called which might give the central government greater power. Clinton was not well disposed toward the proposal, and the legislature disapproved the action of the Annapolis Convention. State loyalty was partly responsible for this attitude but other factors were equally important. New York was situated so favorably for trade that the tariff barriers between the states did not prevent its commercial prosperity. Furthermore, an elaborate central government might require heavier taxes. A more serious objection was the belief of many that a strong federal government would be less responsive to democratic control and would place civil liberties in jeopardy.
When Congress issued a call for a new convention to meet at Phila- delphia in May 1787, the New York legislature agreed to send delegates "for the sole and expressed purpose of revising the Articles of Con- federation." Robert Yates, John Lansing, and Alexander Hamilton were selected, but only Hamilton had a real interest in strengthening the powers of Congress. The Philadelphia Convention exceeded its instruc- tions and drew up a new constitution. In early July, Yates and Lansing withdrew, claiming the Convention had overstepped its power by proposing a strong federal government. Hamilton, who played a minor role at Philadelphia, was the only New York delegate to sign the docu- ment.
When the proposed Constitution was submitted to the Continental Congress, Melancton Smith of New York protested against recommending its adoption by the states unless a bill of rights was added. Smith's protest was disregarded, and on September 28, 1787, Congress sub- mitted the Constitution to the states for their approval. Since the New York legislature did not meet until January 1788, there was considerable time for discussion.
The debate over ratification was so intense that, for the first time since the Revolution, two clear-cut political factions emerged. The Federalists, who formed what was first known as the Federal and later as the Federalist party, were championed by Alexander Hamilton and argued for adoption. The Anti-Federalists, led by George Clinton, urged rejec-
·
125
THE AGE OF GEORGE CLINTON
tion. The campaign over ratification was fought largely in the news- papers, where letters written by men of various viewpoints were published under pseudonyms. The Federalists were at a decided disad- vantage because Governor Clinton had a strong personal following among New Yorkers. Hamilton realized the need to win converts-an objective not to be accomplished by the usual invective letters to newspapers. Consequently, he enlisted the aid of James Madison, a Virginian, and John Jay to write a series of scholarly letters explaining the merits of the Constitution. These appeared in the newspapers under the name "Publius." The articles were quickly gathered together and republished in a book called The Federalist. Although the letters were written ex- pertly and read widely, they were too scholarly to have much appeal to the average citizen. They remain to this day the most important commentaries on the Constitution.
Although the New York legislature of 1788 was controlled by the Clintonians, the governor adopted a strategy of delay. Perhaps he feared that some of his followers would accept the Constitution under the pressure of debate or perhaps he feared the political consequences of defeating it. In all probability he hoped to avoid the issue entirely. Since the Constitution would not become effective unless ratified by nine of the thirteen states, if Clinton could delay discussion of the proposal until it had been rejected by five states, there would be no need to even consider it. Under such circumstances the onus of defeating the Con- stitution could not be laid at the door of the Clintonians.
The first delaying tactic was a legislative resolution calling for the election of a convention during the month of April to reject or ratify the Constitution. The enactment provided that all free male citizens of twenty-one years and over could vote for delegates to the convention. No other state allowed such wide suffrage on this issue. Apparently the followers of Clinton desired to place ballots in the hands of the farmers and city workers who, they expected, would oppose the Constitution. The election was a triumph for Clinton's forces, with forty-six Anti- Federalists and nineteen Federalists chosen. The backers of Hamilton won less than 25 per cent of the popular vote despite the overwhelming support of the press. Only the region of metropolitan New York and Westchester County elected Hamiltonian delegates.
An able and distinguished group assembled at Poughkeepsie on June 17, 1788, to argue the issue of ratification. Foremost among the Fed- eralists was Alexander Hamilton, capably supported by John Jay, Robert R. Livingston, James Duane, John Sloss Hobart, and Richard Harison. The Anti-Federalists relied upon Melancton Smith and John Lansing to carry the greater share of the debate, George Clinton, who spoke
126
A SHORT HISTORY OF NEW YORK STATE
rarely, worked behind the scenes. The Anti-Federalists elected Clinton president of the convention and, strangely enough, agreed to discuss the Constitution at length instead of putting it to an early vote.
The issue of ratification resulted in the organization of an effective party to oppose the Clintonians, who had controlled the state since 1777 with little opposition. Some generalizations can be drawn as to the composition of both parties. On the whole the same line-up of groups continued for the rest of the century, although individual leaders oc- casionally crossed over to the opposing camp.
The Federalists could draw upon a tradition of aristocratic rule, which was stronger in New York than in the other northern states. Their leaders believed that one of the primary purposes of government was the pro- tection of property. Men of wealth and family, they insisted, had the chief stake in government, whereas propertyless persons were irrespon- sible and improvident. The bulk of large landholders endorsed the Federalist position, although a few, such as Pierre Van Cortlandt, John Lansing, and John Williams, were numbered among the Anti-Federalists. The landed families wanted a national government strong enough to protect property rights. The frequent antirent movements in the colonial period, the leveling doctrines of Daniel Shays in 1786, and the violation of land titles by the Vermont insurgents made the landholders keenly aware of the necessity of a strong government. The landed aristocracy and their close associates among the merchants were acquiring huge tracts in western and northern New York and often sent their sons to develop these wilderness lands. The Federalist group thus had outposts in the upstate counties. Probably William Cooper of Cooperstown and the Wadsworths of Genesee are the best examples of back-country Federalist leaders.
Most of the great merchants favored the adoption of the Constitution for the same reasons as the landlords. They hoped a strong central government would eliminate interstate trade barriers and secure favorable commercial treaties with foreign nations. Furthermore, the new Con- stitution forbade the states to issue bills of credit and to pass stay and tender laws; these provisions would prevent inflation-minded farmers from disturbing the stability of business. The ablest lawyers, especially those who had business ties with merchants and landlords, tended to side with their clients. In brief, the Federalist party represented the rich and well born.
On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists drew their strength from the humble but more numerous lower classes. The yeoman farmers and the tenant farmers were ordinarily staunch supporters of Clinton. These men had no love for the landlords, whom they often regarded as petty tyrants, and they also feared that a strong national government would impose
127
THE AGE OF GEORGE CLINTON
a tax on land-a matter of great concern to tenants because leases usually required the leaseholder to pay such a tax. Perhaps the fervent words of young De Witt Clinton, the nephew of the governor, will il- lustrate the fears of the Anti-Federalists:
From the insolence of great men-from the tyranny of the rich-from the unfeeling rapacity of the excise-man and Tax-gatherer-from the misery of despotism-from the expense of supporting standing armies, navies, placemen, sinecures, federal cities, Senators, Presidents, and a long train of et ceteras Good Lord deliver us!
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.