USA > Washington > Standard history of the city of Washington from a study of the original sources > 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 | 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
18
History of the City of Washington.
farm "Scotland Yard," and it comprised what is now South- east Washington. Another, Francis Pope, named his place Rome, and called a small stream at the foot of his hill, Tiber River. It is told of this dreamer, that he predicted a greater capital than Rome would occupy that hill and that later genera- tions would command a great and flourishing country in the new world. He related that he had had a dream or vision, in which he had seen a splendid parliament house on the hill, now known to us as Capitol Hill, which he purchased and called Rome, in prophetic honor of the great city to be.
His title to the land may be somewhat convincive of his prophecy, as it was deeded under the name "Rome," June 5, 1663. It reads :
"Layd out for Francis Pope of this Province Gentleman a parcel of land in Charles County called Rome lying on the East side of the Anacostian River beginning at a marked oak standing by the riverside, the bounded tree of Captain Robert Troop and running north by the river for breadth the length 200 perches to a bounded oak standing at the mouth of a bay or inlet called Tiber."
His furrows have long since given place to streets and buildings; his stream still flows in the old course, less glorious, perhaps, though more useful, as it now serves the modern use of a city sewer.
Some of the descendants of those early Scotch and Irish farmers were among the first proprietors of the City of Wash- ington and many of their descendants have continued to help build the capital and the country to the present day.
Many of the great men and women of our Country have come down from these old Scotch-Irish pioneers, who settled not only on this site, but all along the Potomac River and other parts of the then known country. They were people who had been persecuted in their own country, and their determined efforts for freedom and prosperous homes, together with like determination in other home-makers of the different colonies, gathered in force and importance, making a people of sturdy mould, of like desires and of democratic principles, who were,
19
History of the City of Washington.
at a later day, to break all bans and form a new country on the earth,-a country of freedom for all people.
The Seventeenth Century closed and the Eighteenth advanced many years without any remarkable event disturbing these workers, living their contented lives, with plenty of work to occupy them and much beauty to behold in the great woods, hills and rivers, on which floated majestic swans in great num- bers, fish abounded in the waters, and birds of the air, now no longer known to this region, often passed overhead in flocks of thousands and tens of thousands during migrating seasons.
As time progressed and English subjects were occupying their plantations and smaller tracts in the new world, the French were broadening their claims until finally encroachments on their part caused Britain's children to become alert and question their safety if encroachment continued unmolested. So, as preparation against possible invasion, ammunition and other army supplies were sent to Virginia, which colony then occupied large territory in the West.
The English governor, Robert Dinwiddie, a Scotchman, was ordered in 1753 to write a protest to the French Commandant, which done, the Governor looked about for a trustworthy mes- senger to carry the message. A young man then only twenty-one years of age, George Washington, who had already served his country in several useful capacities, was selected for the import- ant duty, and history tells of his successful trip through almost insurmountable difficulties.
Chevalier de St. Pierre received the young envoy with courtesy, but his reply to the English protest was a refusal to comply with the request, which unwelcome answer Washington was compelled to carry back through the winter woods, a trip through which in those early days, was almost Herculean. It is recorded that an Indian guide attempted to shoot Washing- ton during this return trip and that his life was also endangered by a fall into the Alleghany River, at that time filled with floating ice.
It is known how, after this failure to bring about amicable relations, the English, in 1754, sent the ill-fated expedition
20
History of the City of Washington.
under General Braddock against the French, which was the beginning of hostilities that ended only after years of fighting, in English victory. This long French and English war is mat- ter of history, mentioned here only to bring forward George Washington, who then played a conspicuous part and was later to take such active part in the history of his country.
Governor Dinwiddie's choice shows the esteem in which the young Washington was held at twenty-one, and this respect of his elders began at a much earlier age. During his early years George Washington was learning to be a surveyor, gaining rough and valuable experience in Virginia wilds with Indians and other woods inhabitants. At sixteen Lord Fairfax engaged him to survey his lands of thousands of acres and the lad proved himself capable of such a performance. The government sur- veyors engaged in laying out the Appalachian forest reserve have recently reported finding the marks left by Washington in running the lines of Lord Fairfax's lands.
These early incidents of Washington's life had an important if indirect bearing upon the subsequent establishment of the National Capital. As will be noted later, one of the important considerations which determined the selection of the present site was its accessibility to the country west of the Allegheny Mountains by way of the Potomac River, the Cumberland Pass, and the headwaters of the Ohio River. It was this route which Washington traversed in the occasion of his mission to the French and again in company with the Braddock expedition. After the close of the Revolution he again, in 1784, journeyed across the mountains by the same route. His familiarity with the importance of the Western Territory and of the advantages of the Potomac route which he acquired on these trips was doubtless an important factor among the influences which brought Congress to adopt the site on the Potomac for the Federal City.
CHAPTER II
The Adoption of the Site on the Potomac
HE Capital City of the United States is the only national capital the establishment of which was to a material degree due to or influenced by the purpose of the national authority to protect itself from its own citizens.
It will be recalled that near the close of the Revolutionary War a body of dissatisfied soldiers of the American Army marched to Philadelphia where the Continental Congress was then holding its sessions, and with threats of violence demanded of that body the satisfaction of certain demands, chief among which was that for the settlement of arrears of pay due the soldiers. This was in June of the year 1783. The immediate result of this action on the part of the revolutionary soldiers was that on June 21, 1783, the Continental Congress passed the following resolution :
"Resolved, That the President and supreme executive council of Pennsylvania be informed that the authority of the United States having been this day grossly insulted by the disorderly and menacing appearance of a body of armed soldiers about the place within which Congress were assem- bled, and the peace of this city being endangered by the mutinous disposition of the said troops now in the barracks, it is, in the opinion of Congress, necessary that effectual measures be immediately taken for supporting the public authority.
"Resolved, That the committee, on a letter from Colonel Butler, be directed to confer, without loss of time, with the supreme executive council of Pennsylvania, on the prac- ticability of carrying the preceding resolution into effect ; and that in case it shall appear to the committee that there is not a satisfactory ground for expecting adequate and
22
History of the City of Washington.
prompt exertions of this State for supporting the dignity of the Federal Government, the President on the advice of the committee be authorized and directed to summon the members of Congress to meet on Thursday next at Trenton or Princeton, in New Jersey, in order that further and more effectual measures may be taken for suppressing the present revolt, and maintaining the dignity and authority of the United States.
"Resolved, That the Secretary at War be directed to com- municate to the commander in chief, the state and disposi- tion of the said troops, in order that he may take immediate measures to dispatch to this city such force as he may judge expedient for suppressing any disturbances that may ensue."
On June 21, a committee consisting of Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Ellsworth was appointed for the purpose of conferring with the Supreme Executive Council of Pennsylvania with a view to obtaining the protection of Congress by the militia of the State of Pennsylvania, and on June 24 that committee returned a lengthy report in which the attitude of the author- ities of that State was set forth as follows :
"That the council had a high respect for the represen- tative sovereignty of the United States, and were disposed to do everything in their power to support its dignity. That they regretted the insult which had happened, with this additional motive of sensibility, that they had them- selves had a principal share in it. That they had consulted a number of well-informed officers of the militia, and found that nothing in the present state of things was to be expected from that quarter. That the militia of the city in general were not only ill provided for service, but disin- clined to act upon the present occasion. That the council did not believe any exertions were to be looked for from them, except in case of further outrage and actual violence to person or property. That in such case a respectable body of citizens would arm for the security of their prop- erty and of the public peace; but it was to be doubted what measure of outrage would produce this effect, and in particular, it was not to be expected merely from a repeti- tion of the insult which had happened."
Without going at length into the methods by which the mutiny was dealt with, and the equanimity of Congress, which
23
History of the City of Washington.
had removed to Princeton, restored, it is sufficient to note that the immediate effect of the incident was the commencement of a series of discussions which was destined to last through a period of seven years looking to the establishment of the seat of government to be under the exclusive jurisdiction of Con- gress. The matter first came up in definite form when, on October 6, 1783, the order of the day having been called for and read, it was resolved "that the question be taken in which state buildings shall be provided and erected for the residence of Congress, beginning with New Hampshire and proceeding in the order in which they stand." The question upon each state passed in the negative, no state having received more than four votes, New Jersey and Maryland having each received that number.
The first consideration of a proposal to acquire territory for the establishment of a new capital city, and apparently the first consideration of the Potomac River as the site thereof appears in a motion by Mr. Gerry of Massachusetts, seconded by Mr. Howell of Rhode Island, on Tuesday, October 7, 1783, as follows :
"That buildings for the use of Congress be erected on the banks of the Delaware, near Trenton, or of Potomac, near Georgetown, provided a suitable district can be pro- cured on one of the rivers as aforesaid for a Federal town, and the right of soil and an exclusive or such other juris- diction as Congress may direct shall be vested in the United States."
Omitting a review of the long series of motions, counter- motions and debates relating to the proposed Federal city which constituted a very considerable portion of the proceedings of the Continental Congress, it is worth while to call attention to the fact that repeatedly the motions for the adoption of one site or another contained the proviso found in Mr. Gerry's motion, namely that "the right of soil and an exclusive or such other jurisdiction as Congress may direct shall be vested in the United Stated."
It is interesting to note the striking and fundamental dif- ference between this language and that later adopted by the
24
History of the City of Washington.
Constitutional Convention, to which the question of providing for a permanent capital was shifted. By Section eight of Article 1 of the Constitution Congress is given power :
"To exercise exclusive legislation, in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding 10 miles square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Con- gress, become the seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places pur- chased by the consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings."
It will be observed that with regard to the seat of govern- ment, that the Constitution makes provision for "exclusive legislation," only, over such District as may by cession of particular states and the acceptance of Congress become the seat of government. As to sites for forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards and other needful buildings, the Constitution gives Congress like authority over all places "purchased by the con- sent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be." It is evident from the language used in the Constitution, that as to places acquired for forts, magazines, arsenals and dock- yards, its framers contemplated not only that Congress should exercise exclusive legislation over such places, but that the title to the land acquired for such purposes should be in the United States. The land was to be purchased not from the State in which it might be situated but from its individual owners, with the consent of the state legislature.
But as to the territory to be acquired as the seat of govern- ment, it is evident from the language used in the Constitution, that there was no thought of any purchase of title to the land further than of such as might be necessary for government pur- poses. The territory was to be acquired not by purchase but "by cession of particular states." By this cession the states were to transfer to the United States merely their sovereignty over the territory ceded-not the ownership of the land. The ownership of the land was to remain in the individual proprietors and only so much of the land to be purchased by the United States from such proprietors, as should be needed
25
History of the City of Washington.
for government purposes. In line with this thought, the act of cession of Virginia of December 3, 1789, and the Act of Mary- land of December 19, 1791, ratifying the cession of that State, both contained provisoes to the effect that nothing therein contained should be construed to vest in the United States any right of property in the soil or to affect the rights of individuals therein otherwise than as the same should or might be trans- ferred by such individuals to the United States.
This proviso of the Maryland and Virginia Acts, as well as the spirit of the Constitutional provision for the Federal Terri- tory, are notably different from the underlying idea involved in Mr. Gerry's original motion for the establishment of a Capital City on the Potomac River and embodied in nearly all of the motions and resolutions on the subject of the location of a permanent capital discussed by the Continental Congress. In the propositions considered by the Continental Congress, the almost invariable language: "provided a suitable district can be procured * and the right of soil and an exclusive or such other jurisdiction as Congress may direct shall be vested in the United States," indicates that the consideration of primary importance during that period was that the Federal Government should own the soil itself. The matter of exclusive jurisdiction was then regarded as of secondary importance, as is clearly to be gathered from the repeated use of the alternative provision,-provided an exclusive or such other jurisdiction as Congress may direct, shall be vested in the United States.
The reversal of the attitude of the founders upon the ques- tion of the respective importance of these two considerations was of fundamental consequence in its bearing upon the future relationship between the Federal Government and the District of Columbia. Whether this has worked to the detriment or to the advantage of the latter, it is impossible to say; but it is safe to assert that if the Constitution had provided for the acquisition not only of jurisdiction but also of the "right of soil" by the United States as provided for in the motions con- sidered by the Continental Congress, and if these requirements had been observed in the acquisition of the site for the Federal
26
History of the City of Washington.
city, Congress would not have taken between seventy and eighty years to come to a realization of its obligations toward the development of the District of Columbia, nor, having come to that realization be constantly holding over the District the menace of a reversal of its attitude. As proprietor of all the land, it would at least have felt and could not have evaded the responsibilities incident to the ownership of the land. Whether the opportunities for outsiders to move in and assist in build- ing up a beautiful capital city would have been so favorable, and whether the burden upon the population as lessees of the government would have been greater or less than as owners of the land, it is impossible to say; but in any aspect of the case the National Government would have been compelled to recog- nize from the outset its primary responsibility for the municipal expense of the District, regardless of the measures to be adopted by it in seeking contribution or reimbursement from the local population.
Immediately upon the assembling of the Congress provided for by the Constitution, the question of the establishment of a permanent seat of government was taken up. The discussion was marked, as it had been during the sessions of the Con- tinental Congress, by a divergence of sentiment between the Northern and Southern states,-the former favoring a city to be established upon either the Delaware or the Susquehanna, and the latter a city to be established upon the Potomac. The discussion at times was exceedingly acrimonious as is evidenced by Mr. Madison's remark in the course of a debate, that had a prophet started up in the Constitutional Convention and foretold the proceedings of that day, he verily believed that Virginia would not then have been a party to the Constitution.
The final determination to locate the Capital City upon the Potomac River was probably ascribable to a number of important considerations. Its location there was in a measure a compliment to General Washington, and had the further advantage of being the most nearly accessible to both the Northern and Southern states of any site that could have been selected. Another geographical reason which played a highly
27
History of the City of Washington.
important part, in the adoption of that location, was the fact that the Potomac River allowed of a site, which could be reached by ocean navigation, the farthest inland of any to be found on any of the rivers of the Atlantic seaboard, and at the same time afforded the shortest line of communication with the vast undeveloped region to the west, the most important point of which at that time was the present site of the City of Pitts- burg. The head waters of the Potomac and the head waters of the Ohio River approach so close to each other that these two rivers afford an almost continuous potential water passage from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ohio Valley. General Wash- ington had as has already been told traversed this route on several occasions prior to the Revolutionary War and in the fall of 1784 had again traversed it on the occasion of a trip to the Western country. He was an ardent believer in the feasibility of utilizing this route as a great commercial highway when developed by means of canals. He had in fact organized the Potowmack Company in 1785 for the purpose of clearing the channel of the Potomac and building canals around the Great and Little Falls, and the work was in course of prosecu- tion while the debates on the site for the federal city were in progress. It was expected that the region west of the Allegheny Mountains would rapidly become populated and developed, and with this expectation in mind, the importance of placing the National Capital where it could be most easily reached by the population which should settle in this new Western country was obvious to every one.
In the records of the proceedings of Congress for Septem- ber 14, 1789, appears the following discussion which will serve to indicate the force of this argument in determining the ques- tion where the Capital City should be placed :
"Mr. Scott, of Pennsylvania, observed that the question seemed to lie between the Susquehanna and the Potomac. He gave a geographical description of those rivers, in rela- tion to their advantages of communication with the Western territory; he considered Pittsburg as the key of that territory. The result of his detail was clearly in favor of the Potomac. That there is no comparison between the
28
History of the City of Washington.
advantages of one communication and the other, with respect to the Ohio country. The Potomac will, no doubt, one day be a very important channel into those regions. That though he thought that the Potomac was nearer the center of communication between the Atlantic and the Ohio than the Susquehanna, as there was no prospect of a decis- ion in favor of the former he should give his vote for the Susquehanna. In this situation, as he was a native of Pennsylvania, there was a certain duty which he owed to his country, and which he should now perform."
Mr. Madison, in debate (on the 4th of September), observed-
"if there be any event on which we may calculate with tolerable certainty, I take it the center of population will continually advance in a southwestern direction. It must then travel from the Susquehanna, if it is now found there. It may go beyond the Potomac; but the time will be long first; and, if it should, the Potomac is the great highway of communication between the Atlantic and the Western country, which will justly prevent any attempts to remove the seat farther south. I have said, sir, that the communi- cation to the Western territory is more commodious through the Potomac than the Susquehanna. I wish all the facts connected with this subject could have been more fully ascertained and more fully stated. But if we consider the facts which have been offered by gentlemen who spoke, we must conclude that the communication through the Potomac would be much more facile and effectual than any other."
Mr. Madison stated the probable distance by land from the seat of government, if fixed on the Potomac, to Pittsburg, at 170 or 180 miles ; if by the river, 250 miles; and from the seat of Government, if fixed on the Susquehanna, by land, 250; by the river, 500.
"Whether, therefore [he said], we measure the distance by land or water, it is in favor of the Potomac; and if we consider the progress in opening this great channel, I am confident that consideration would be equally favorable. It has been determined, by accurate research, that the waters running into the Ohio may be found not more than 2 or 3 miles distant from those of the Potomac. This is a fact of peculiar importance."
The journal kept by William Macklay, Senator from
29
History of the City of Washington.
Pennsylvania, who was an ardent advocate of the site on the Susquehanna River, recites that a decisive argument in favor of the site on the Potomac was an estimate of the expenditure which would be required to render the Susquehanna navigable. On the other hand, the Potowmack Company of which President Washington was the moving spirit had already demonstrated the practicability of opening to navigation the Potomac and its tributaries from their headwaters to tidewater at George- town, and had carried this project well toward completion.
All of the considerations above noted, however, would prob- ably have failed to bring about the selection of the Potomac River as the site for the Federal Capital, owing to the reluctance of the Northern States to place the seat of government so far south, had it not been for an additional consideration less legitimate but undoubtedly much more powerful than the others. The Northern States were exceedingly anxious to have the Federal Government assume the debts contracted by the several states in the prosecution of the Revolutionary War, and a measure to this effect had been ardently championed by Alexander Hamilton as part of the general fiscal scheme which he was endeavoring to put in operation. The Southern States were opposed to this measure, and finally agreed to its passage, but only when the consent of the Northern States to the location of the Capital City on the Potomac River had been pledged. The manner in which the final compromise was brought about is interestingly related by Mr. Jefferson in the collection of notes which he entitled his "Ana," as follows :
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.