Rhode Island : three centuries of democracy, Vol. I, Part 63

Author: Carroll, Charles, author
Publication date: 1932
Publisher: New York : Lewis historical Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 716

USA > Rhode Island > Rhode Island : three centuries of democracy, Vol. I > Part 63

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).

366

RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY

which a large number of the functions of administration were entrusted to royal or proprietary appointees, and there had been no opportunity for contrasting attitudes. Rhode Island had tasted more of liberty and democracy than the rest, and was more jealous accordingly. The efforts of Morris and Hamilton were vain; Virginia had been persuaded by the eloquence of Howell of the danger of entrusting too many functions to the union, and had begun to recede from federalism. When Virginia repealed its ratification of the impost, a landslide against it was precipitated. Congress, on December 24, on receiving news of the action of Virginia, resolved "that the deputation to Rhode Island, be, for the present, suspended, and that a com- mittee be appointed to report such further measures as it may be proper for Congress to take upon the subject at large."

HOWELL'S VICTORY AROUSES ENMITY-Howell had won a victory at the expense of incurring enmities which were manifested immediately in an undertaking to destroy him politically both in Congress and in Rhode Island. Congress resolved, on December 6, "There is reason to suspect that as well the national character of the United States and the honor of Congress, as the finances of the said states may be injured and the public service greatly retarded by some publications that have been made concerning the foreign affairs of the said states," and "that a committee be appointed to inquire into this subject and report what steps they conceive are necessary to be taken thereon." The committee reported, on December 12, a paragraph printed in the "Boston Gazette" as correspondence from Providence purporting to prove the success of foreign loans, thus: "This day letters have been read in Congress from Mr. Adams, of the 16th of August, and Mr. Dumas, his secretary, of the 19th. The loan he is negotiating fills as fast as could be expected. The national importance of the United States is constantly rising in the estimation of European powers and the civilized world. Such is their credit that they have, of late failed in no application for foreign loans, and the only danger on that score is that of contracting too large a debt." From the federal point of view the objection to the paragraph was that it negatived the necessity of an impost tax. The com- mittee reported a resolution instructing the Secretary of Foreign Affairs "to write to the Executive of Rhode Island, requesting him to inquire through what channels the above com- munication was made, and who is the supposed author of the extract referred to." The Sec- retary of Foreign Affairs was discharged from these instructions on December 18, "Mr. Howell, a delegate from the State of Rhode Island, having acknowledged himself as the author of the extract of the letters quoted in the report of the committee." To this resolu- tion, altogether unjust because it not only implied a stigma but also represented Howell as acknowledging conduct that was censurable by Congress, Howell objected. Congress refused, however, Rhode Island alone voting yes, to substitute for the resolution another carefully drawn and offered by Howell, acknowledging that the paragraph printed in Boston contained sentences from a letter written by him to Governor Greene and another written by him to the "Providence Gazette," and printed on November 2, and "absolutely protesting generally against any power exercised or claimed by Congress to call any member of their body to account for any information which he may think proper to communicate to his constituents, the secrets only of Congress excepted, and more especially against any powers in the present Congress to call to account a member of the late Congress"; and "further alleging and pro- testing that the resolve . ... appointing a committee of Congress on late publications is a departure from the dignity of Congress and tends to establish a procedure dangerous to the freedom of the press, the palladium of liberty, civil and religious; and that the resolve . . . . accepting the report of the said committee against a certain paragraph in a newspaper, and demanding the writer thereof to be delivered up . . .. is, in effect, an infraction of the fifth article of the Confederation, which allows freedom of speech and debate in Congress, and, of course, a free communication of such debates and speeches to their constituents by the mem- bers of Congress, without being accountable to that body for the propriety of what is said,

WILLIAM ELLERY

WILLIAM ELLERY (1727-1820) Signer of the Declaration of Independence and Chief Justice of the Superior Court of Rhode Island

367

RHODE ISLAND AND THE UNION

debated or communicated; and declaring that the facts stated in the said paragraph, respect- ing foreign loans, are substantially true, and can be established by authentic documents in pos- session of Congress." Howell in his substitute resolution charged also that the paragraph as reported by the committee of Congress had been extracted from its context in a letter, and that parts only of the paragraph as written and printed had been reported to Congress, "thereby fixing it on the journals in . ... a detached and maimed condition." He admitted that "in his private opinion, he is, has been, and has a right to be against the five per cent. impost (his constituents expected him not to approve it)." While he regretted that his posi- tion "has drawn on him the resentment of any, he will endeavor to sustain it with a fortitude becoming the cause of freedom and his country"; "his constituents have hitherto approved his conduct, and he trusts they will not fail to support him. He considers himself as their servant, and to them alone is he accountable for his doings; and, under them, servant of the United States, but not the servant of Congress." Howell had succeeded, through his substitute motion, though it was rejected, in getting a statement of his position on the "Journal of Con- gress"; Hamilton immediately assumed direction of a movement to censure Howell and Arn- old, presenting a resolution thus: "Congress having .... admitted in their Journals an entry of a motion made by Mr. Howell, seconded by Mr. Arnold, highly derogatory to the honor and dignity of the United States in Congress assembled, resolved that a committee be appointed to report such measures as it will be proper for Congress to adopt thereon." Arn- old and Howell were not sustained in offering an amendment to strike out the words "highly derogatory to the honor and dignity of the United States in Congress assembled." The com- mittee reported a recommendation that copies of the two resolutions, one identifying Howell as the author of the paragraph objected to, and the other, censuring Howell and Arnold, be sent to Rhode Island. Arnold, in January, moved that the Secretary of Foreign Affairs be directed to transmit to Rhode Island certified copies of extracts from certain letters that would establish the truth of Howell's statements, and thus precipitated a debate in Congress in the course of which several amendments to Arnold's motion were offered, including a preamble as follows: "Whereas, the delegates of the State of Rhode Island have frequently interrupted and delayed the important business of Congress, by their solicitations to obtain certain extracts from letters received by Congress," etc. Eventually the matter was sent to committee, and the committee recommended no action further than "that, to obviate misrepresentation, it will be advisable to transmit to the Executive of the State of Rhode Island a copy of Mr. Arnold's motion and the proceedings thereupon, with a request that precautions may be taken to pre- vent them appearing in the public press." Arnold not only supported Howell in Congress, but also wrote home to Governor Greene letters praising his colleague, thus : "It appears to have been his first and only wish to serve his country generally, and especially his constituents, with unshaken fidelity." He has had no separate interested views to lead him from these objects. · . He ever showed a desire to do justice, consistent with honor and economy, and, judg-

ing that in many instances, the gratuities and salaries of the civil officers were beyond what the present circumstances of the people could bear, he has missed no proper opportunity of speaking freely his opinion thereon, and to enforce the necessity of their reduction. He has been zealous and active in endeavoring to obtain justice in regard to the western territory. . He has also exerted himself to obtain some effectual measure whereby the public accounts might be collected upon constitutional principles and the public credit thereby restored, without the necessity of recurrence to measures unknown in and contrary to such principles. But I am sorry to say in this his exertions have hitherto proved fruitless. For his conduct in the preceding matters has been looked upon in an invidious light by those whose principles and conduct have been opposed to him. He has been treated with a coldness and indifference which must have been extremely mortifying to his feelings, and which to avoid, would have swerved from his purpose anyone not endowed with an uncommon share of firmness. I have

368

RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY

reason to expect that the inveterate enmity which his honest and patriotic zeal in his country's cause have raised in the breasts of those to whom he has been necessarily opposed, will be exerted and follow him to his home, and that the most unremitting industry will be used to injure him in the state he has with so much integrity represented." Arnold wrote on Decem- ber 18: "He (Howell) has vindicated himself with a firmness becoming a representative of a free state. And as the liberties of the state and its rights by confederation, I conceived to be invaded by the measures pursued against him, he has had every support I could afford him. This had drawn upon me the attention of Congress." In January Arnold wrote: "It was soon obvious that the favorers and expectants of that measure (the impost) considered him (Howell) as the chief stumbling block in the way of their wishes." Referring to the action of Congress with reference to the publication of dispatches in the "Providence Gazette," he said: "It was now beyond a doubt that the proceedings originated in a fixed design to ruin Mr. Howell's credit and character with the state he served, and thereby destroy that influ- ence he was supposed to have in opposing the impost, their favorite object." The General Assembly sustained Howell and Arnold in resolutions adopted at the February session, 1783, which included: "That the motion containing a declaration and protest made by Mr. Howell and seconded by Mr. Arnold . . . . appears to be just, true and proper, and that this General Assembly do highly approve of the conduct of their delegates in making said motion, declara- tion and protest ; that the extracts of letters . . .. do fully justify the representations made to this state by its delegates ; that this General Assembly entertain a high sense of the meritorious services rendered to the state and to the cause of freedom in general by the firm and patriotic conduct of the said delegates, particularly in their strenuous exertions to defeat the operation of measures which the state considered dangerous to the public liberty." And the people reelected both Howell and Arnold in the next general election. The persecution of the Rhode Island delegates was waged vigorously in and out of Congress. Arnold and Col- lins, who had replaced Howell under the state's plan for maintaining at any time only two delegates of the four elected, reported to Governor Greene in February that they were "extremely mortified to be told, when anything is offered against the principle and the sense of the legislature and people of Rhode Island declared, that the state is foreclosed from any opposition at this day ; that their consent has been once given fully and absolutely in favor of half-pay, and that it is too late now to make objections, or declare what are the present opin- ions of the state on the subject, and the 'Journals of Congress' are produced to show that Gen- eral Cornell had committed the state by giving their vote in favor of that measure, etc."

In the attempt to discredit Howell and Arnold at home the services of Thomas Paine were enlisted, and he wrote a series of letters which were published in the "Providence Gazette," and other letters which were published elsewhere. Paine's letters were answered by Howell and others. Varnum also wrote a series of letters favoring the impost.

A FRESH IMPOST PROPOSITION-Meanwhile Congress had been persuaded to modify the impost proposition and to recommend other measures conforming to the ideas of the Rhode Island delegation. The impost as recommended by Congress on April 18, 1783, was limited (I) to be applied "to the discharge of the interest or principal of the debt contracted on the faith of the United States for supporting the war"; (2) to collection in each state by officers appointed by state authority ; (3) to twenty-five years unless the debt should be sooner paid ; and was to be supplemented by taxes levied by the states and paid into the treasury of the Confederation amounting annually for a period of twenty-five years to $1,500,000. Rhode Island's share was apportioned as $32,318. Congress also recommended liberal cessions of the western lands, and that Confederation taxes be apportioned on the basis of population instead of in proportion to the value of privately owned land. Population was to be computed as "the whole number of white and other free citizens and inhabitants of every age, sex and condition, including those bound to servitude for a term of years, and three-fifths of all other

369

RHODE ISLAND AND THE UNION

persons not comprehended in the foregoing description, except Indians not paying taxes." Rhode Island delegates, Collins and Arnold, wrote to Governor Greene on April 23, concern- ing the modified proposition : "To produce this, in its present form, has been a work of time. . ... Everything has been suggested and done to take off the objections and render it pala- table to the several states which could be done consistently with a fixed determination of pre- serving in Congress a power to collect and appropriate the revenues. .. . . It would have been less exceptionable to us had the officers for collecting the revenue been under the con- trol as well as the appointment of the state. And we conceive the appointment of officers for twenty-five years incompatible with the constitution of the state, which requires all officers to be chosen annually. We are also at a loss to reconcile the idea of appointing officers, which when made, immediately become independent of their makers, with the principles of liberty. But we are happy that it will be submitted to the consideration of an Assembly, whose delib- erations on former occasions have been marked with wisdom, and have discovered a thorough knowledge of their constitutional rights, as most striking testimonies of which we appeal to the difference between the present and former resolutions on this subject. If it should be the opinion of the Assembly to adopt the resolution generally, we take the liberty to mention that a deviation, so far as relates to the control of the officers, may be made, with a probability of its being acquiesced in by Congress; and if this was to be done in the New England States, it would be a good additional guard to the rights of the states-a matter of the highest impor- tance, and which requires to be kept in constant view."

The conclusion of the war and the successful floating of loans in foreign countries relieved somewhat the pressure for money, and Congress, while urging ratification of the impost propo- sition of 1783, was not disposed to use the pressure that had been resorted to on behalf of the earlier measure. Enmity toward Rhode Island was not so strong, and there were some who recognized merit in the courageous position maintained by Rhode Island and her delegates in Congress. General Wadsworth representing Connecticut in Congress in 1784, declared that "Rhode Island had saved the liberties of the United States once, and perhaps they might again." Blair McClenachen of Philadelphia, while advocating the impost project as modified in 1783 as wise and good, declared that it had been fortunate for the country that the earlier plan had failed "as it was not right." Hamilton's vigorous argument against Rhode Island's objections, including advocacy of strength in the federal government for which the coun- try was not prepared, had not only failed to affect Rhode Island, but had awakened dis- trust elsewhere. The Connecticut General Assembly adopted a letter of remonstrance against the position taken by Hamilton; his letter had had the effect of crystallizing a rising sentiment for state rights that was to render futile any attempt to amend the Arti- cles of Confederation. Public sentiment was swinging favorably to Rhode Island. Howell, writing home in February, 1784, said: "Indeed, it is generally allowed that our dispo- sition" to the project of 1781 "was meritorious; and I have had the pleasure of hearing many fine things said of the state, which have, in a measure, balanced for the harsh things said of it last year. I will not repeat the compliments which have been paid to me personally, by some perhaps sincerely, and by others, who concluded by saying that they made no doubt but I would use my influence for the present measure." Evidently he was suspicious of "Greeks bearing presents"; Howell had not relinquished his opposition to any form of conti- nental impost, and his determination to resist to the utmost any measure tending to diminish Rhode Island independence.

The General Assembly, in May, 1783, instructed the Rhode Island delegates to "make up all the measures in your power to obtain a repeal of the late resolution of Congress for allowing the amount of five years' whole pay to officers in compensation for half-pay," which had been granted in spite of Rhode Island opposition. Rhode Island's reasons for objection were "that the Articles of Confederation make no provision for appropriations of money to

R. I .- 24

370

RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY

such purposes, and, therefore, the resolution cannot be effectual without the acquiescence of the respective legislatures. The General Assembly of this state cannot comply with a requisi- tion of this kind, because the measure tends to a military establishment in time of peace, is unequal in its application, as no regard is had to time of service; is unjust in its operation, as the states that have raised the greatest proportionate number of soldiers, with the smallest number of officers, will be the greatest sufferers, and because the sum to be paid will amount to much more than the purpose intended." Collins and Arnold acknowledged receiving the instructions, but declared the time unfavorable for an attempt to obtain repeal because only eight states were represented, and nine were required for important business. This condition was characteristic of Congress for a large part of the ensuing year. Congress had adjourned from Philadelphia because of a riotous demonstration by a part of the army, demanding meas- ures for relief. Writing from Princeton in September, Ellery and Howell said: "Since the adjournment of Congress to this place little business has been done. This may be ascribed, partly to the confusion necessarily following such an event; but principally to an incomplete representation for the states. Sometimes Congress has adjourned for want of seven states. Nine are seldom on the floor at once." The letter contained also a long discussion of the impost question, which had become almost an obsession with Howell. He was continually finding new and ingenious objections to a continental impost, and because of the enmity against himself and his own non-sympathetic analysis of men, measures and motives, was drifting steadily into opposition to most propositions before Congress, and was becoming more defi- nitely anti-federalist and more set in the maintenance of state rights. Asserting that in Mas- sachusetts a letter written by the delegates had been suppressed, and a vote favorable to the impost obtained by presentation of mutilated paragraphs from other letters, he declared: "I cannot find words strong enough to express my indignation at the base means, the intrigue, the chicanery, the deceit, the circumvention, the fetches, the side winds, the bye blows, the ambushes, the stratagems, the manœuvering, the desultory attacks, the regular approaches, the canting and snivelling, as well as swearing and lying, and, in short, the total prostitution of every power and faculty of body and mind and office, to carry a point, which I need not name." Of the project of 1781 he wrote: "The states are now generally astonished that they should ever have been led into such an error to give Congress the vast and uncontrollable powers sus- tained in this ordinance. Virginia, South Carolina and North Carolina repealed their hasty grants, as did the lower house of Massachusetts. Georgia and Rhode Island never granted the request to Congress." He reported seven states as having ratified the project of 1783, but added: "Should some more comply and bring the measure near to a crisis, I expect that some states will repeal these acts, as others did the former." For want of a quorum or the consent of the number of states required by the Articles of Confederation, Congress was lit- tle better off as an efficient legislative body at Annapolis than it had been at Princeton. Rhode Island invited Congress to meet within the state, and offered to find a suitable assembly hall at state expense. Howell served on a committee, including also Thomas Jefferson and Jere- miah T. Chase, that reported a plan for the temporary government of the western territory, one provision of which forbade slavery or involuntary servitude except as a punishment for crime, after 1800. This anti-slavery provision failed of adoption as it was supported by only New York and Pennsylvania and the New England states, six states, and seven were neces- sary. Jefferson was out-voted by his colleagues from Virginia.

John Brown was elected as delegate to Congress in 1784 to succeed Jonathan Arnold, who had removed to Vermont. Ellery, Howell and Marchant were reelected, but Marchant resigned. The General Assembly fixed the term of the delegates-elect as beginning on the first Monday in November, corresponding with the opening of the session of Congress under the Articles of Confederation. In 1777 the General Assembly had directed that delegates should serve for one year or until their successors were elected, and qualified; to meet the

371

RHODE ISLAND AND THE UNION

situation arising because of the term first established in 1784, the General Assembly expressly provided that the delegates elected in 1783 should hold over until November, 1784. On the ground that the Articles of Confederation provided for annual appointment of delegates, and did not authorize an appointment for a longer period, a group in Congress, hostile to Howell, undertook to exclude him and Ellery from voice and vote in proceedings. Congress spent two weeks in debating motions intended to bring the question to issue, in the course of which all the finesse of parliamentary law was resorted to. Howell referred to the matter in a letter writ- ten May 22, thus : "Our old credentials for the last election have been called in question, and the whole business of the nation was suspended for the last six days in canvassing the subject, notwithstanding . ... so much business of importance calls for our attention. Some young men in Congress pursue the object of taking our seats in Congress, as if it was of the first magnitude." A postscript to the same letter added: "I have been in hot water for six or seven weeks-ever since business has been taken up in earnest . . . I have received two written challenges to fight duels ; one from Colonel Mercer of Virginia, the other from Colonel Spaight of North Carolina. The Journals will give their political character. I answered them that I meant to chastise any insults I might receive, and laid their letters before Congress." The General Assembly rejected the proposal to change the basis of apportioning continental taxes from land and buildings to population. To a request by Congress that the state delega- tion be maintained at three, instead of two delegates, to meet the situation whereby a state lost its vote by disagreement of its delegates, Rhode Island answered that it would agree to an amendment reducing the minimum delegation to one, thus resubmitting one of the amend- ments proposed when the Articles of Confederation were ratified.

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.

Rhode Island : three centuries of democracy, Vol. I, Part 63

Author: Carroll, Charles, author Publication date: 1932 Publisher: New York : Lewis historical Pub. Co. Number of Pages: 716

Author: Carroll, Charles, author
Publication date: 1932
Publisher: New York : Lewis historical Pub. Co.
Number of Pages: 716