USA > Rhode Island > Rhode Island : three centuries of democracy, Vol. I > Part 64
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 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101
"The seasonable and firm stand made by Rhode Island against the all-grasping hand of power, in the case of duties, has saved the United States. And I should be wanting, as well in duty to the state as to my own feelings if I should neglect to inform them that they have the thanks of thousands of the wisest and best men in the union for their conduct," wrote Howell from New York on January 12, 1785. But if the union had been saved from destruction through the excessive zeal of those who would have centralized power in Congress, it was not less in danger of dissolution from sheer inertia. In strength it might be feared; in impotence Congress had become almost pitiable. Howell was not eligible for reelection, having served three years. Of four delegates elected in May, 1785, none attended any session of Congress. James Manning and Nathan Miller were elected delegates by the General Assembly in Feb- ruary, 1786, following a resolution by Congress directing its chairman "to write to the execu- tives of the states of Rhode Island, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia, stating to them the inconveniences arising from a want of a sufficient number of states to pro- ceed in the business of the union, and earnestly pressing them to send on their delegates immediately." "Three months of the federal years are now completed," wrote the chairman, "and in that whole period no more than seven states have, at any time, been represented. . . . The most essential interests of the United States suffer. . The remissness of the states in keeping up representation in Congress naturally tends to annihilate our Confederation. That once dissolved, our state establishments would be of short duration. Anarchy or intestine war would follow, till some Cæsar seize our liberties, or we should be the sport of European polities, and perhaps parcelled out as appendages to their several governments." Manning, who was president of Rhode Island College, accepted election to Congress principally in the interest of the college, for which he hoped to collect a claim for rent and reparation for dam- age while the college estate was used for public purposes in war time. He took his seat on May 3, 1786, but Rhode Island had no vote in Congress, for want of the minimum delegation required, until his colleague, Miller, appeared on July 14. Meanwhile Manning was reduced almost to want for need of money ; he had left the state without public funds, and depended on Miller to carry the expense money voted by the General Assembly. Congress was also in
-
372
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
serious straits ; Manning wrote, early in June: "Matters highly interesting to this Confed- eracy, and, indeed, I think the question whether the federal government shall long exist, are now before Congress, and there are not states sufficient to transact the necessary business, as we have now barely nine states on the floor. Our affairs are come very much to a point, and if the states continue to neglect keeping up the delegations in Congress, the federal govern- ment must ipso facto dissolve." Later he wrote to Miller: "Never, probably, was a full delegation of the states more necessary than now, for you may rest assured that in the opinion of every member of Congress, and in the several departments, things are come to a crisis with the federal government. You say you think the present house do not want a Congress ; they may, it is more than probable, very soon see the accomplishment of their wishes, for without a speedy reform in the policy of the states, the federal government must be no more." Perhaps the severe economic stress that Manning was suffering for want of money in a strange city contributed to his altogether gloomy picture of Congress. The General Assembly, in 1785, passed an act providing for an impost and other taxes, to be collected by state offi- cers, the proceeds to be remitted in part to the continental treasury and in part to be applied to payment of interest on the continental debt in Rhode Island. This enactment was so com- pletely dissimilar to the impost proposed by Congress in 1783 that a committee of Congress in 1786 reported Rhode Island as one of four states that had "not decided in favor of any part of the system." A year later, in February, 1786, the Assembly passed another impost act subject to such conditions that it was scarcely a compliance with the request of Congress ; New York failed to act in 1786, and the project was abandoned. The Assembly in Febru- ary, 1786, enacted also a measure granting to Congress a limited control over interstate and foreign commerce, in such terms that Rhode Island was classed with ten states that had not complied with a request of Congress. Little as had been the concessions thus made in 1786 from the strongly negative position assumed by Rhode Island in earlier years, they were suffi- cient, with a rising demand for the issuing of paper currency, to sweep Governor Greene and Deputy Governor Bowen out of office in May, 1786, and to place the government of Rhode Island in control of a coalition of states rights and paper money advocates headed by John Collins as Governor and Daniel Owen as Deputy Governor. It was the result of the May election in 1786 which prompted Miller to write to Manning that he thought "the present house do not want a Congress." The coalition played an important part in determining Rhode Island's relations to the union for the following four years-the most critical in the history of the United States.
MOVEMENT FOR A NEW CONSTITUTION-The Virginia General Assembly, on January 21, 1786, appointed commissioners to meet other commissioners from the different states in the union, at a time and place to be agreed on, for the purpose of framing such regulations of trade as may be judged necessary to promote the general interest. Patrick Henry's letter of January 23, announcing this project for an interstate conference, was followed, February 19, by a letter written by Edmund Randolph, which suggested "the first Monday in Septem- ber next as the time and the city of Annapolis as the place for the meeting." The Rhode Island General Assembly, at the June session, 1786, appointed Jabez Bowen and Christopher Champlin as commissioners on the part of Rhode Island. Champlin declined and was replaced by Samuel Ward. The Annapolis convention met on September II and adjourned on Sep- tember 14, after reaching in three days an agreement to recommend the calling of a consti- tutional convention to meet at Philadelphia in May, 1787, which was destined to fulfil the prophecy of Varnum in his letter of April 2, 1781 .* Delaware, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia were represented at Annapolis. Besides Rhode Island, New
*Vide supra.
MAJOR GENERAL NATHANAEL GREENE Monument on Left of South Approach to State House (Photo by R. B. Burchard)
373
RHODE ISLAND AND THE UNION
Hampshire, North Carolina and Massachusetts appointed commissioners; Jabez Bowen, of Rhode Island, was on his way to Annapolis, when news reached him that the conference had adjourned, and he turned back. Connecticut, Georgia, Maryland and South Carolina ignored the invitation to send commissioners to Annapolis. Congress indorsed the recommendation of the Annapolis conference in resolutions adopted February 21, 1787, in part as follows : "Whereas . ... experience hath evinced that there are defects in the present Confederation, as a means to remedy which several of the states, and particularly the state of New York, by express instruction to their delegate in Congress, have suggested a convention, . . . resolved that in the opinion of Congress it is expedient that . ... a convention of delegates, who shall have been appointed by the several states, be held in Philadelphia for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation, and reporting to Congress and the several legislatures such alterations and provisions therein as shall, when agreed by Congress and confirmed by the states, render the federal constitution adequate to the exigencies of govern- ment and the preservation of the union." The Rhode Island House of Deputies in March rejected a motion to send delegates to the constitutional convention. In May, following elec- tion, the House of Deputies, by one majority, voted to send delegates; but the Assistants did no concur. In June the Assistants voted to send delegates, but the House of Deputies did not concur. Rhode Island was the only state not represented at Philadelphia, and was roundly abused at the time. The General Assembly in a letter addressed to the President of Congress in September presented "reasons why this state has not had a delegation at the convention at Philadelphia," parts of which follow:
RHODE ISLAND POSITION EXPLAINED-Our conduct has been reprobated by the illiberal, and many severe and unjust sarcasms propagated against us, but, Sir, when we state to you the reason and evince the cause, the liberal mind will be convinced that we were actuated by that great principle which hath ever been the characteristic of this state, the love of true constitutional liberty, and the fear we have of making innova- tions on the rights and liberties of the people at large. . . . Your honorable body informs us that the powers vested in Congress for the regulation of trade were not sufficient for the purposes of the great national regu- lation requisite. We granted you, by an act of our state, the whole and sole power of making such laws as would be effectual for that purpose. Other states not passing similar laws, it had no effect. An impost was likewise granted,t but other states in the union not acceding thereto, that measure has proved abortive. The requisition of February 21 last hath not been acceded to because we conceived that as a legislative body we could not appoint delegates to do that which only the people at large are entitled to do. By the law of our state, the delegates in Congress are chosen by the suffrages of all the people therein, and are appointed to represent them in Congress; and for the legislative body to have appointed delegates in Congress (unless upon death or other incidental matter), must be absurd, as that delegation in convention is for the express purpose of altering a constitution to which the people at large are only capable of appointing the members.
As the freemen at large have power of electing delegates to represent them in Congress, we could not . consistently appoint delegates to a convention which might be the means of dissolving the Congress of the union, and having a Congress without a Confederation. You will impute it, Sir, to our being diffident of power and an apprehension of dissolving a compact which was framed by the wisdom of men who gloried in being instrumental in preserving the religious and civil rights of a multitude of people and an almost unbounded territory, that said requisition hath not been complied with, and fearing, when the compact should once be broken, we must all be lost in a common ruin. We shall ever esteem it a pleasure to join with our sister states in being instrumental in whatever may be advantageous to the union, and add strength and per- manence thereto, upon constitutional principle.
Consistently with this reasoning, Rhode Island was the only state that submitted the Federal Constitution to a popular referendum. The General Assembly was no more unani- mous, however, on "the reasons" for its failure to send delegates than it was in the policy
tThe Rhode Island measures granting Congress an impost and the power to regulate commerce were so restricted as not to satisfy Congress.
374
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
that should be pursued, as evidenced, with reference to the latter by the varying votes in Assembly in March, May and June, and with reference to the former by a formal protest signed by nine of the ten Deputies from Newport and Providence, from which the following extracts are taken :
We, . . beg leave to protest . . for the following reasons : First, for that it has never been thought heretofore by the legislature of this state, or while it was a colony, inconsistent with or any innova- tion upon the rights and liberties of the citizens of this state to concur with sister states or colonies in appoint- ing members or delegates to any convention proposed for the general benefit. . . . Secondly, that the powers mentioned in the said letter to have been vested in Congress for the regulating of trade were granted by the legislature of this state, as also, finally granting the impost, which is inconsistent with the ideas contained in the letter that such powers were not in the legislature but in the people at large; thirdly, that by the Articles of Confederation it is expressly provided that when any alteration is made in the Articles of Confederation, it shall be . . confirmed by the legislature of every state, which is expressive that this power is in the legislature only ; fourthly, as by the Articles of Confederation the appointment of dele- gates in Congress is declared to be . in said manner as the legislature of such state shall direct . . . . and the legislature . . . prevents their delegation from proceeding to Congress until special orders or directions from the legislature, so it is certain the legislature had constitutionally the power to send mem- bers to a proposed convention ; . . fifth, as it would have been our highest honor and interest to have complied . . . . so it would have been more consistent with our honor and dignity to have lamented our mistake and decently apologize for our errors than to have supported them on ill-founded reasons and inde- fensible principles. .
The protesting deputies expressed regret that, within the time limit of one hour, they had been constrained to confine themselves to only some of the reasons for dissent suggested by the letter to Congress. The division on protest and letter was betwixt town and farm, much as the division on the paper money issue was betwixt merchant and farmer. The agrarian agitation along the northern border, which, in its disorderly aspects had been sum- marily suppressed in Rhode Island in 1783, had developed by 1787 into Shays' rebellion in Massachusetts. In Rhode Island the more liberal democracy in the political organization had permitted the farmers to obtain control of the General Assembly. Thus they had been able to carry out their program for an emission of paper money,* the agrarian device for the time being for avoiding taxation and relieving an economic pressure that was interpreted as due to want of ready money principally. The Rhode Island farmers foresaw in a strengthened cen- tral government a restriction of the power that they had seized through control of the state government. The merchants, on the other hand, had reached an understanding of the advan- tages to trade and commerce and the general economic prosperity that could be promoted by union, and welcomed a strengthened central government as a restraint upon the agrarian movement.
THE CONSTITUTION REJECTED BY THE PEOPLE-The convention at Philadelphia was completing its labors as the Rhode Island General Assembly was busy with letter and pro- test ; two days later the convention sent the Constitution of the United States of America to Congress, with recommendation that it be submitted for ratification to popular conventions in the several states. Congress, on September 28, resolved unanimously that the report of the convention be transmitted to the several legislatures "in order to be submitted to a conven- tion of delegates chosen in each state by the people thereof." Rhode Island was not repre- sented in Congress at the time. The Rhode Island General Assembly at the October session ordered 1000 copies of the report of the convention printed and "sent to the several town clerks of the state, to be distributed among the inhabitants, that the freemen may have an
See Chapter XV.
375
RHODE ISLAND AND THE UNION
opportunity of forming their sentiments of the proposed constitution." The Assembly fur- ther, "conceiving themselves representatives of the great body of the people at large and that they cannot make any innovation in a constitution which has been agreed upon, and the com- pact settled between the governors and the governed, without the express consent of the free- men at large, by their own voices individually taken in town meetings assembled," submitted the Constitution to a referendum of freemen on the fourth Monday in March, 1788. The act authorizing the referendum provided for a voice vote in open town meeting with a regis- tration of "the name of each and every freeman and freeholder, with the yea or nay, as he shall respectively give his voice aloud in open town meeting," a copy of the record to be certified to the General Assembly. The Assembly rejected a proposed amendment, to submit to the freemen the question of calling a convention, and also voted down a motion to order a convention. The referendum was decisively against the Constitution, 2708 nays, 237 yeas. Only fifty per cent. of the freemen had voted, but the total vote, 2935, was seventy per cent. of the vote cast for Governor, 4287, in 1787, which from modern experience with the refer- endum on constitutional amendments and other questions might be considered very satisfac- tory as an indication of the actual crystallization of public opinion. In modern elections many voters ignore altogether questions on the ballot, limiting their suffrage to choosing officers ; and special elections on questions as a rule call out only a small fraction of the potential or even the qualified electorate. An analysis of the vote by towns on the question of ratifying the Constitution in 1788 indicates that the overwhelming majority against the Constitution was due in part to refusal of the friends of the Constitution to participate, by voting, in pro- cedure which they considered futile as contrary to the method of ratification proposed by Con- gress. They knew, as well as the members of the General Assembly who ordered the refer- endum, that a majority of the freemen of Rhode Island at the time were not in favor of the Constitution. To avoid a fair test of strength by refusing to vote was good politics. Besides, strict construction might necessitate calling a convention to ratify the Constitution even had the unexpected happened and the referendum been favorable. Moreover, without a conven- tion there would be no opportunity for consideration of amendments, which would incorpo- rate in the Constitution changes that might win approval. In Providence only one freeman voted in town meeting, and he said "nay," although the town was almost unanimous for ratification. Coventry, Cranston, Foster, New Shoreham, North Providence, and Scituate also cast no votes for ratification, and Johnston, Newport, Richmond and South Kingstown only one each, against large votes, except in Newport, for rejection. Only two towns, Little Compton, 63-57, and Bristol, 26-23, returned majorities favorable to the Constitution. Newport voted 10-I negative, but two days after the referendum the town meeting in Newport reassembled and instructed the Newport Deputies in the General Assembly to vote for a constitutional con- vention. Bristol and Providence freemen sent petitions to the General Assembly requesting a convention. The House of Deputies in March, 1788, voted down a proposal to call a con- stitutional convention, and thus the matter rested in Rhode Island, with two negative votes on the main question and an adverse referendum on the Constitution.
COUNTRY VS. TOWN-When news reached Rhode Island, on June 24, that the New Hamp- shire convention had ratified the Constitution, and thus the nine states necessary for putting the new plan into operation had acted favorably, informal celebrations were inaugurated by friends of the Constitution. Three days later a public meeting of citizens in Providence planned for July 4 a celebration of the adoption of the Constitution by nine states and of the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the exercises to include a barbecue on Jeffer- son Plain, north of the Cove. Special invitations were sent to the Governor, Assistants, gen- eral officers and judges, and a general invitation to the people of town and country was pub-
376
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
lished in the "Providence Gazette" and "United States Chronicle." The country was aroused to prevent the celebration, and on the evening of July 3 some 3000 armed men were moving on Providence, 1000 of whom had gathered near Jefferson Plain before midnight. Fortu- nately there was no resort to violence; committees representing town and country met early on the morning of July 4 and reached an agreement that only American independence should be celebrated ; that the town "would not celebrate the day on account of the adoption of the new Constitution by nine states, or on account of said Constitution in any respect whatever ; that no salute should be fired or toasts drunk in honor of said Constitution, or in honor of any state or states which have adopted said Constitution; that they would only honor the day by a discharge of thirteen cannon and thirteen only, that the celebration of the day should be in honor of the independence of America and that only, and that they would not publish or cause to be published any account contrary to said agreement." David Howell, that staunch opponent of a Continental impost and defender of the liberties of the people, was one of the town committee-he was in 1788 an aggressive supporter of the Federal Constitution! The celebration continued as agreed, and the farmers retired. On July 5 citizens of Providence fired a salute of ten cannon to celebrate ratification by ten states, following news that the Virginia convention had acted favorably. In April, 1788, the freemen in election meetings had chosen delegates to the Continental Congress to meet in November. Again in April, 1789, the Rhode Island freemen chose delegates to the Continental Congress to meet in November, 1789. The Continental Congress of 1788-89 did not succeed in organizing. When the spring election of 1789 was conducted in Rhode Island the First Congress under the Constitution, eleven states represented, had already organized, and the inauguration of George Washington as President was to follow within a few days on April 30. As Rhode Island elected the first delegates to the Continental Congress in 1774, fifteen years later she elected the last delegates ; but there was then no Continental Congress, and Rhode Island was no longer one of the United States of America.
RHODE ISLAND DELAYS ACTION-The constitutional convention in New York suggested the calling of a general interstate convention to consider amendments to the new Constitu- tion, and the Rhode Island General Assembly, in October, 1788, referred the New York letter to town meetings "to give their Deputies instructions whether they will have Deputies appointed to meet in convention with the state of New York and such other states as shall appoint the same." The response was indifferent; eight towns favored an interstate conven- tion ; five favored a Rhode Island convention to adopt and ratify the Constitution ; seventeen were content with the Articles of Confederation. Five hundred citizens of Providence, in May, 1789, petitioned the General Assembly to call a convention, picturing the poverty of the state to follow the destruction of commerce, already threatened by the framing in Congress of a "bill laying such heavy imposts upon articles transported from hence to any of them, as well those of the growth and manufacture of this state as foreign merchandise, as will amount to a prohibition." The House of Deputies had already voted five times against calling a convention : (I) in February, 1788, by 30 majority ; (2) in March, by 27; (3) in October, by 26; (4) in December, by 22; (5) in March, 1789, by 18. A motion to call a convention was presented and debated in May, 1789, and was postponed to an adjourned session in June, when the vote was negative, 32-22, 15 being absent. At a special session in September, 1789, the General Assembly, asserting that they, "on the most careful examination of the powers vested in them by the freemen of this state, are of the opinion that the same are limited to the administration of the existing constitution of the state, and do not extend to devising or adopting alterations," directed the freemen in town meetings to give "instructions to the rep- resentatives respecting the appointment of a state convention for the purpose of considering
377
RHODE ISLAND AND THE UNION
and determining on said Constitution, to the intent that this Assembly, at their session in Octo- ber, next, may be fully acquainted with the sentiments of the people at large relative to calling a convention for the purpose aforesaid." In a letter to "the President of the Senate and the House of Representatives of the eleven United States of America in Congress assembled," adopted at the same session, the Assembly declared :
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.