Prelude to a Revolution (1754 – 1774)

Changes in Colonial Outlook

- So how was it that the happy colonists changed their minds and, after over a century of peaceful subordination to Britain, began fighting for independence in 1776? 

- Many factors affected their change of opinion. It was in the 1750s that the colonists first began looking away from their internal politics and paying attention to British policies, and the story of the 1760s and early 1700s is really a series of events that, one by one, widened the split. 

- But it really all began with the Seven Years War [a.k.a. King George’s War, the French and Indian War], which ended in 1763 and left North America transformed. 

The Seven Years War

- The Seven Years War informally began in July 1754 in the Ohio Valley when an inexperienced George Washington attacked the French, who were building a fort. The French kicked his sorry butt, so he surrendered, but the incident still managed to eventually spark a major war in Europe and in America. 

- Right before the war actually started, in June 1754, delegates from several colonies had met for the Albany Congress, which had the goals of (1) convincing the Iroquois [who had always used their neutrality as a diplomatic weapon against all the sides involved] to join them and (2) coordinating colonial defenses. Neither goal was met b/c the governors of the individual colonies feared losing their autonomy.  

- So Washington had screwed up big time, and throughout 1755 the British [under Gen. Braddock], who decided to attempt to kick the French out of N. America, continued to get beaten by French & Indian forces. Their only success was the deportation of the French from Nova Scotia [they sent them to Louisiana].

- After news of one particularly disastrous battle in 1756 the British and French formally declared war in Europe as well. Things still went badly in America, partially b/c the British and colonial forces just didn’t get along. But in 1757 the new secretary of state, William Pitt, managed to encourage the colonial forces to enlist by offering a compromise [Brits. would supposedly refund assemblies for their losses]. 

- Consequently [and also b/c of events in Europe] things improved until finally in 1763 France surrendered. According to the Treaty of Paris, France lost all her N. American possessions. 

British-Colonial Tensions During the Seven Years War

- Both the Seven Years War itself and its aftermath increased British-colonial tensions. During the actual war, these factors contributed to initial anti-British feeling in the colonies:

• The colonials favored Indian-style guerilla tactics; the British marched in formation. 

• Colonial militias served under their own captains but the Brits. wanted to take charge.

• The colonials had no military protocols; the British were big on all that stuff.

• The colonials didn’t want higher taxes to help pay for the war but the Brits. felt the colonials should pay for their own defense.

• The colonial officers were casual but the Brits. wanted servants w/them, etc. 

- Clearly, different styles of fighting led to significant resentment on both sides. 

1763: A Turning Point

- The end of Salutary Neglect: 

- Both the British and colonists were strongly affected by the end of the war. For Britain, its conclusion meant that (1) they had a much larger and safer colonial empire, (2) they had a much larger debt, and (3) they felt even more contempt for the colonists. 

- For the colonies, the war had (1) united them against a common enemy for the first time and (2) created anger against the British, who were viewed as overly harsh commanders who had distain for the colonists. 

- The end of the war also led to another key event. In Pontiac’s Rebellion (1763) Indian leader Pontiac united an unprecedented amount of tribes due to of concern about the spread of colonists and their culture. 

- Although the colonists eventually triumphed, the British issued the Proclamation Line of 1763, which was a line that the colonists couldn’t settle past, to prevent further conflicts.   

English Attempts to Reorganize their Empire

- Anyhow, due partially to their increasing debt and experiences in America, following 1763 the Brits. decided to reorganize [again]. *Their 1st reorganization, the Dominion of New England, had only lasted from the late 17th century until the Glorious Revolution. 

- In 1761, even before the end of the war, the Brits. allowed for Writs of Assistance [officers allowed to board and inspect ships and confiscate goods not taxed] to be used in the colonies. James Otis brought a case against this [protection of property over parliamentary law] but he lost. 

- Then, from 1763 to 1765 four very irritating pieces of legislation were passed by George Grenville…

• Sugar Act (1764) – existing customs regulations were revised, new duties were placed on some foreign imports, and stronger measures were taken against smuggling. Seems just like Navigation Acts, which were accepted by the colonists, but this time the measures were explicitly designed to raise revenue [as opposed to channeling trade through Britain]. 

• Currency Act (1764) – colonial paper $ was banned for trade [by 1769 it was decided col. $ would have no value at all]. This was passed b/c British officials felt they were being ripped off b/c colonial $ had such erratic values, but it greatly irritated colonial merchants, who lost out b/c their money was made useless.

• Quartering Act (1765) – required a raise in colonial taxes to provide for housing of soldiers in barracks near colonial centers.  

• STAMP ACT (1765) – this was the biggie. It affected almost every colonist b/c it required tax stamps on all printed materials, and it was the worst on merchants and the elite [who used more paper]. The act also asked that stamps be paid w/sterling and that violators be tried in vice-admiralty courts, which alarmed colonists. 

- Though the acts were a natural consequence of the war, which created a large debt for Britain, they greatly annoyed the colonists and led to ever increasing resistance…

Different Theories of Representation

- Grenville’s acts illustrate the different theories of representation. While Grenville and the English believed that Parliament represented all British subjects by definition regardless of where they lived [Virtual Representation], colonists believed that they needed members that specifically represented their regions. 

- Another ideology that was beginning to become popular in the colonies was that of the Real Whigs, who stated that a good government mainly left people alone and that government should not be allowed to encroach on people’s liberties and on their property. 

- Although at first not many people interpreted British actions according to the Real Whig ideology, over time this point of view affected increasing numbers of colonists. 

Colonial Response to the Sugar and Currency Acts

- The Sugar and Currency Acts could not have been implemented at a worse time, b/c the economy was already in the midst of a depression following the shift of the war to Europe. So merchants were all the more annoyed by the new taxes. 

- Nevertheless, while individual colonists protested the new policies, lacking any precedent for a unified campaign Americans were uncoordinated and unsure of themselves in 1764. Eight colonial legislatures sent separate petitions to Parliament [all ignored], but that was it. 

- The most important individual pamphlet relating to the Sugar Act was The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved by James Otis Jr., which discussed the main ideological dilemma of the time – how could the colonists justify their opposition to certain acts w/o challenging Parliament’s authority over them?

1765: The Stamp Act Crisis

- Initially, when the Stamp Act was passed, the response was pretty underwhelming as well. It seemed hopeless to resist. But Patrick Henry, a member of the Virginia House of Burgesses, was not prepared to give up easily and instead wrote the Virginia Stamp Act Resolves. 

- The resolves were passed [though some of the most radical sections were taken out]. The parts that were adopted essentially reasserted that the colonists had never given up the rights of British subjects, which included consent to taxation. This position was that of most colonists throughout the 1760s – they wanted some measure of independence and their rights, but not independence. 

- Ideologically, during this time, America’s leaders were searching for some way to maintain self-government but still remain British subjects. But b/c of Brit. unwillingness to surrender on the issue of Parliamentary power this simply wasn’t going to work.  

- But resistance to the Stamp Act was soon more than ideological arguments about Parliamentary power. Organizations began forming to resist the taxes, such as…

• Loyal Nine – in August 1765 this Boston social club organized a demonstration that also included the lower classes. They also hung an effigy of the province’s stamp distributor, which caused him to publicly promise not to do what he was supposed to. Another demonstration, however, occurred shortly after that – but this time it was aimed at Governor Thomas Hutchinson, and concerned the elites [this illustrates the internal divisions between the demonstrators – for the elite it was political; for the laborers it was economic]. 

• Sons of Liberty – so, to attempt to channel resistance into acceptable forms an intercolonial association, the Sons of Liberty, was formed. Although they could influence events, however, they couldn’t control them totally. 

- Anyhow, by 1766 resistance was occurring on three different fronts: the Sons of Liberty [mass meetings, public support], a non-importation agreement organized by the merchants, and the Stamp Act Congress, which met in New York to draft the Stamp Act Resolves. 

1767: The Townshend Acts

- Then, in March 1766 Parliament repealed the Stamp Act, partially b/c of the non-importation agreements, which turned London merchants against the Act. But the main reason for its repeal was the appointment of Lord Rockingham as prime minister instead of Grenville. 

- Rockingham felt the law was a bad idea, but he still believed Parliament had the rights to tax the colonies and consequently passed the Declaratory Act [we can tax you if we want to], which was pretty much ignored in the midst of the celebrations of the Stamp Act’s repeal. 

- The fragility of the Stamp Act victory was exposed by another change in the ministry. When William Pitt got sick, Charles Townshend became the dominant force and decided to impose some more taxes. 

- The Townshend Acts (1767) were on trade goods [paper, glass, tea, etc.] but were different from the Navigation acts b/c they (1) applied to items imported from Britain and (2) were designed to raise money to pay for the salaries of royal officials [this is no good…remember, the power of the purse]. 

- Additionally, the acts established an American Board of Customs Commissioners and vice-admiralty courts at several colonial cities. 

Colonial Response to the Townshend Acts

- This time there was no hesitation. Many essays were written, but John Dickinson’s Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania best expressed colonial sentiments – Parliament could regulate colonial trade but not use that power to raise revenue. 

- The Massachusetts Assembly called for unity in the face of the Acts and circulated a joint petition of protest, which the ministry ordered them to recall, giving the other assemblies the incentive to join forces against it. Recall was rejected, and the governor dissolved the assembly. 

- Another important aspect of colonial resistance was the second non-importation movement, which was led by the Daughters of Liberty, who encouraged home spinning bees, etc. Although the boycotts were not complete [some merchants, who were now in the midst of a boom, broke the agreements] they still had a significant effect, and in April 1770 the Townshend duties were repealed except for the tea tax. 

- Even though the rest of the Townshend Acts [just not the taxes] were still there, it didn’t seem like such a big deal since the bulk of the taxes had been removed. 

1770: The Boston Massacre

- On the same day Lord North [the new prime minister] proposed repealing the Townshend duties, the rather misnamed Boston Massacre occurred in which five civilians were killed. The source of the problem was the decision to base the Board of Customs Commissioners in Boston. 

- Ever since the customs people came, mobs targeted them – consequently, two regiments of troops were assigned to Boston. They constantly reminded people of British power and also took jobs from Boston laborers, which really annoyed them. 

- So on March 5, 1770 laborers began throwing snowballs at soldiers, which led to shooting [even though it was not allowed]. This was a tremendous political weapon for the patriots [nevertheless they didn’t approve of the crowd action that generated the problem and consequently tried the soldiers fairly]. 

1770 – 1772: The Calm Before the Storm

- From 1770 to 1772 superficial calm prevailed in the colonies. Still, some newspapers began publishing essays that used Real Whig ideology to accuse Britain of scheming to oppress the colonies. It was a conspiracy! But nobody really advocated independence [yet]. 

- So patriots continued to view themselves as British subjects. They devised systems in which they would have their own legislatures but remain loyal to the king, but this was directly contradictory to British conceptions of Parliament’s power. 

- But the calm ended in Fall 1772, when the Brits. began implementing the part of the Townshend Act about governors being paid from customs revenues. In response to this, a Committee of Correspondence [led by Samuel Adams] was created in Boston to gather publicity for the patriot cause.  

1773: The Tea Act and Boston Tea Party

- By 1773 the only Townshend duty still in effect was the tea tax. Though some colonists were still boycotting it, many had given up. But then, in May 1773 Parliament passed the Tea Act, which was designed to save the East India Co. from bankruptcy.

- The Tea Act made EIC’s tea the only legal tea in America and enabled the company to sell directly to the colonies, which would allow them to price tea competitively w/smugglers. Though this would result in cheaper tea, it was seen as another attempt to make them admit that Parliament could tax them by leaders.

- This act led to the famous Boston Tea Party on December 16, 1773, where aprox. 10,000 pounds [money] of tea were dumped into the water. 

1774: The Coercive “Intolerable” and Quebec Acts

- In response to the Tea Party, the Coercive Acts included the…

• Port Bill – the port of Boston was shut down until the tea was paid in full [enforced by Massachusetts Gov. Thomas Gage]. Purpose was to set example for other colonies.

• Government Act – annulled what was left of the Massachusetts Charter [had already gone through several incarnations] and destroyed all colonial power in the legislature. Limited town meetings as well. 

• [new] Quartering Act – this now forced colonial assemblies to either build barracks or have citizens house the soldiers themselves. 

• Administration of Justice Act – soldiers who killed colonists were to be tried in British courts [i.e. allowed to get away w/it]. “Extraterritoriality.”

- The Quebec Acts were passed around the same time – they annoyed colonists b/c they allowed Catholicism in formerly French territories and also allowed the French colonists to go past the Declaration Line and into the Ohio River Valley. 

- The colonists felt as though all their worst fears about the British plot had been confirmed, and the colonies agreed to send delegates to Philadelphia in September 1774 for the Continental Congress. There was no turning back…

The Revolutionary War (1774 – 1783)

1774 – 1775: The Collapse of British Authority and the Development of New Government Structures

- The Coercive “Intolerable” Acts had proven to be just what their name implied, so the colonies agreed to send delegates to a Continental Congress in September 1774 in order to discuss measures to protest the acts. The delegates were elected in extralegal provincial committees that were, incidentally, not allowed.

- Anyhow, when the congressmen met on September 5, 1774 they had three goals:

• To define American grievances.

• To develop a resistance plan.

• And…the tricky one: to define their constitutional relationship w/Britain. 

- After several intense debates, John Adams worked out a compromise position on the constitutional relationship thing. It was declared that Americans would obey Parliament only when they thought that doing so was best for both countries.  

- They also decided that they wanted the Coercive Acts repealed and that they would start an economic boycott and petition the king at the same time. The Continental Association [non-importation of British goods, non-consumption of British products and non-exportation of American goods to Britain] was implemented throughout late 1774 and early 1775. 

- To back them up the Continental Congress recommended that elected committees of observation and inspection be established throughout America. The committeemen became leaders of the revolution on the local level and gained increasing power as time went on [they spied on people and attacked dissenters in addition to overseeing the boycott]. 

- Also during this time the regular colonial governments were collapsing due to patriot challenges to their authority through popularly elected provincial conventions, which usurped the former legislatures’ powers. Through late 1774 and early 1775 these provincial conventions approved the CA, elected delegates for the Second Continental Congress, organized militia and gathered arms. 

- This stunk for royal officials, who were basically in the position of having to drive a car after other people pushed them out from behind the steering wheel [stupid analogy, but I tried]. Courts would hold sessions, taxes weren’t paid, etc. – “independence was being won at the local level but w/o formal acknowledgement.”  

April 19, 1775: The War Begins

- The actual fighting part of the independence movement was sparked when General Thomas Gage in Boston send an expedition to confiscate provincial military supplies at Concord. Paul Revere heard about this, yeah we all know the story. Anyhow there was a skirmish at Lexington [en route] on April 19, 1775.

- Then at Concord the British were met w/even more resistance [at Lexington it had just been a bunch of local militiamen called up at the last minute]. For the year following Concord, the Americans besieged Boston, where the British had retreated. 

- The British only broke away from the siege at the Battle of Bunker Hill [which marked a turning pt. for them strategically from containment of a radical movement in New England to more of a focus on the Middle Colonies] but they suffered heavy losses in doing so. 

British Strategy [or lack of it]

- Lord North made three assumptions [and you know what happens when you assume] about the war:

1. Patriot forces can’t win against British regulars.

2. War in America is the same as war in Europe.

3. A military victory will automatically make the colonies come back to mommy Britain.

- Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. They greatly underestimated American commitment to resistance and also didn’t see that military victories would just not be enough to bring an area as big as the colonies back under control [loss of cities didn’t hurt the cause]. Finally, they just didn’t get it that even if they did win militarily and gained control it wouldn’t last b/c what they had to do was to win the colonies over politically. They tried the political angle in 1778 but by then it was too late. 

American Advantages/Disadvantages in the War

- Britain’s less-than-brilliant [to say the least] strategy brings us to…American advantages in the war:

• They were fighting on home soil [makes big difference b/c people fight w/more conviction if they are fighting for their land AND they also knew the area as a result].

• The colonists also had easier access to supplies and better tactics. 

• Lastly, they didn’t have inanely stupid generals who were only in it for their own personal glory and consequently didn’t work together like the British did. 

- On the other hand…

• They didn’t really have a bureaucracy to organize the war effort like Britain did – they only had the Second Continental Congress, which was planned as a brief meeting to talk about the CA but ended up having to be the main intercolonial government. But even though this task was initially daunting it worked out after a while – the big accomplishment being their creation of the Continental Army [they chose Washington to lead it] and their management of it. 

• The British had more, better-trained troops and [initially] control of the seas. 

- In the end France was a big help for the colonists [no kidding huh].

1776: Moving Towards Independence

- Remember that, initially, even when Britain and the Americans were fighting, independence had not been decided upon yet [not everyone agreed w/that radical course of action – these representatives sent the Olive Branch Petition to King George III, which rejected the petition with the proclamation of Rebellion]

- In January 1776, a huge step towards the decision to declare independence was taken when Thomas Paine released his book, Common Sense, which was an instant bestseller and had an enormous impact b/c of its challenge of colonial assumptions about the colonies’ relationship to Britain. 

- Largely b/c of Common Sense, by late spring in 1776 independence had become inevitable. On May 10 the Second Continental Congress proposed that individual colonies start forming state constitutions, and all the loyalists dropped out of the CC. 

- On June 7 some congressmen introduced a motion towards independence. While the vote was postponed until July a five-man semi-committee was established to draft a declaration. Of course, Thomas Jefferson was the guy who ended up writing it – and it was adopted on July 4. 

- The chief importance of the Declaration was its statement of principle [the life, liberty and happiness thing] and the explanation of government being based on the consent of the people. After the Declaration was signed, there really was no turning back – b/c the delegates had committed treason. 

The War: A Quick Overview

- Now, we don’t really need to know the specifics on the war, so this is just going to be the basics. The war had three phases b/c of changes in British strategy. They were as follows:

1. [1776 – late 1777] Containment in New England – the British initially believed that the revolution was basically a radical minority movement centered in New England so they concentrated their forces there. But then came The Battle of Bunker Hill and…

2. [late 1777 – early 1778] Middle Colonies – the British realized it was not going to be that easy, so they shifted down into the middle colonies in an attempt to divide the colonies by gaining control of the Hudson River and Mohawk Valley. Then after the debacle at Saratoga (1778), which also caused the French to join the colonists b/c they realized they actually had a chance, they gave up on that and made a last ditch effort in…

3. [early 1778 – 1781] The South – they hoped to get loyalist support and use supplies from the West Indies to win in the South. They took Charlestown, but since the French were there to back the colonists up in the sea it didn’t help them much. The very last stages of the war were very bloody and desperate, culminating in Yorktown (1781) where a trapped Cornwallis surrendered and the war ended. 

1783: The Treaty of Paris

- The Americans soon disregarded their instructions from their leaders to follow the French b/c they [correctly] realized that the French were not so much their allies as they were Britain’s enemies. 

- The gamble paid off, though, b/c with Ben Franklin leading the negotiations the treaty, which was signed on September 3, 1783 included their two must-have goals: (1) recognition as an independent nation and (2) firm national boundaries from the Mississippi to the Atlantic and from Canada to Florida. 

- Of their non-essential goals, they didn’t get the one about (!) annexing Canada [you think] but did gain access to the fisheries in Newfoundland [they had requested access to all British fisheries in Canada]. 

- So, by 1782, what had seemed to be a distant dream a few years earlier had become reality [I had to end this with one of those corny type sayings, just like the textbook – sorry].

From the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution (1776 – 1789)

Varieties of Republicanism

- Although most Americans after the war felt that their country should be a republic, and that its citizens should be virtuous to maintain the republic’s stability, there were three different interpretations of the concept of republicanism…

• One was mainly held by the educated elite [ex. the Adams family] and emphasized the necessity of a small, homogenous republic in which the citizens would be willing to sacrifice their own private interests for the good of the whole. In return for sacrifices equality of opportunity would prevail, eventually creating a merit-based “natural aristocracy.” 

• Another was held by other members of the elite and some skilled craftsman [ex. Alexander Hamilton] and was more about economics, drawing on Adam Smith’s theories about individual self-interest leading for the best for the community. It stated that if everyone followed their private interests republican virtue would be achieved. 

• Yet another was held by less educated people and some radicals [ex. Thomas Paine] and emphasized widening participation in government in order to give ordinary people more of a say (the egalitarian approach). 

- All three approaches still shared the concept of the contrast between corrupt Britain and industrious America and felt that the republic could only succeed through hard work and virtue. 

Creating a Virtuous Republic

- Since pretty much everyone was sure that America could only work if the citizens were virtuous, artists, educators, and politicians began trying to inculcate values into people. For instance…

- In art they had a tough time b/c to many Americans art was an example of corruption and luxury. Nevertheless, artists tried to show virtue and nationalism in their work. 

- For example: William Hill Brown wrote The Power of Sympathy (1789) to warn women about seduction; Royall Tyler wrote The Contrast (1787) about good vs. bad behavior; and the most popular book of the time was Mason Locke Weem’s Life of Washington (1800) w/the cherry tree myth, etc.; Gilbert Stuart and Charles Willson Peale painted portraits of good republican citizens; John Trumbull painted history battle scenes; Thomas Jefferson set the standard for American architecture by suggesting imitation Roman buildings w/simplicity of line, harmonious proportions and a feeling of grandeur. 

- In education two major changes reflected the new concern for raising good citizens: (1) some northern states began using tax money to support public elementary schools and (2) schooling for girls was improved. Judith Sargent Murray was the big theorist on women’s education – she claimed that men and women were equally intelligent and that it was only the difference in education that made women appear stupider. So, she concluded, girls should receive the same education as boys. 

- There was also a rethinking of women’s roles in general due to their contributions in the war. The new POV on women in a republic society is best expressed by Abigail Adams’ letter to her husband stating women deserved equal rights (remember the ladies). Overall, however, Americans still saw women as housewives (coverture survived) and as (b/c of their selflessness) the embodiment of republican virtue and sacrifice – Republican Motherhood, which called for women to teach their children. 

The First Emancipation

- Naturally, there was that other contradiction…slavery. Everybody saw this, including the slaves, some of who created petitions (which were ignored). 

- So in the North the “gradual emancipation” began: in 1777 Vermont abolished slavery, in the 1780s Massachusetts courts decided their constitution prohibited it as well, in 1780 and 1804 respectively Pennsylvania and New Jersey adopted gradual emancipation laws.

- In the South, however, slavery was the backbone of the economy and was consequently not affected by Revolutionary ideology. Even in the North there was a concern for property, which was why it was gradual, not immediate…but in the South, it was out of the question. 

- Nevertheless, the number of free blacks grew a lot after the Revolution due to escapes during the war, slaves serving in the army, or slaves being freed by their owners (in the Chesapeake this was due to economic changes such as the shift from tobacco to grain, which was less labor intensive). 

- The freed slaves mostly migrated towards Northern cities, but even there emancipation didn’t bring equality, as laws discriminated against blacks. So blacks formed their own institutions (schools, churches, etc.) and joined together in semi-separate communities.

The Development of Racist Theory

- The post-revolutionary years also saw the development of a formal racist theory, as Southerners needed an excuse for not including African Americans in the whole “all men are created equal” deal. 

- So instead of (as they had before) stating slaves were inferior b/c of environmental factors, they now decided they were inherently inferior b/c Africans were somehow less than fully human. 

- The concept of “race” consequently became applied to skin color for the first time. This not only unified whites and blurred class distinctions between them, but also led to the creation of a certain set of characteristics (laziness, dishonesty, sexual promiscuity) that became associated with all blacks.  

- From the start, then, the republic was seen as a white male enterprise – some historians have even stated that subjugation of other groups was necessary for the creation of white solidarity, others have contended that drawing the racial lines lessened the danger of poor white men joining w/slaves in questioning the elite.

The Creation of Republican State Governments

- In May 1776 the Second Continental Congress ordered states to create republican governments to replace the provincial congresses that had been in power since 1774. So began the process of forming the first state constitutions…

- The first thing most states decided was that constitutions would be written by special conventions, which were elected throughout the early 1780s. After the constitutions were written they were submitted to voters for ratification. 

- The state constitutions concentrated on the distribution and limitation of government power – American’s experiences w/Britain determined this in a big way as, back in the colony days, Americans had learned to have a phobia of centralized authority [governor]. 

- So, they gave the governor little independent authority, limited his term of office and the # of times he could serve and expanded the powers of the legislature. Overall, they focused a lot more on protecting the citizens than on making the government effective. In fact, the governments turned out so weak most of them had to be rewritten during the war [governor got more power, legislature got less]. 

- Through the process of revising the constitutions many politicians began developing the good ol’ theory of checks and balances, which was later embodied in the 1787 Constitution. 

The Articles of Confederation

- Unfortunately, the principles that were developed on the state level were not implemented on the national level for a while. First, during the war, the powers of the Continental Congress simply evolved by default – it wasn’t until 177 that Congress sent the Articles of Confederation (which was just a written out version of the makeshift arrangements of the CC) to the states for ratification. 

- So what was the Articles of Confederation government anyhow?

• It provided for a unicameral legislature where states could send a certain number of delegates that would then vote as a unit.

• The legislature could: declare war, make peace, sign treaties, borrow $, organize a post office, establish an army and navy, issue bonds and manage Western lands.

• The legislature couldn’t: draft soldiers, regulate interstate commerce, enforce treaties, and collect taxes. 

• A 2/3rds majority was required to pass legislation and a unanimous vote was need for amendment.

• There was no executive and no national judiciary. The national government also had no power over the state governments. States could deal directly w/other countries if Congress allowed it. 

• There was no national currency or system of measurement.

- Some historians (John Fisk) call the period from 1781 to 1788 the “Critical Period” b/c the AOC wasn’t strong enough and the country consequently almost failed. Others disagree (Charles Beard) and claim that it was a time of recovery and progress and that only the elite were hurt, which led to the creation of the Constitution to protect their interests. 

- Regardless of the side one takes it’s pretty clear they had some major issues under the AOC…

Problems under the Articles of Confederation

- Finance was the biggest problem faced by both the state and national governments. First they just tried printing currency, which worked at first b/c there was high demand for supplies and goods during the war. But when the army suffered losses in late 1776 and Americans lost faith in the government inflation began. Although states made efforts to stop inflation, it was pretty much a lost cause and by 1780 American $ was worthless. Also on the economic side, since the government couldn’t implement uniform commercial policies there was economic warfare between the states, which was the last thing merchants needed. 

- The weakness of the national government also affected foreign trade, as the AOC denied Congress the power to establish a national commercial policy. Right after the war Britain, France and Spain restricted American trade w/their colonies, but Congress could do nothing but watch as cheap British goods flood US markets (causing a severe drop in domestic prices, which hurt debtors, esp. farmers). 

- In foreign affairs, Congress was unable to deal w/the Spanish presence on the nation’s Southern and Western borders b/c Congress, which opened negotiations in 1785, was unable to make progress and had to end the talks altogether when Congress split on what they would exchange for the opening of the Mississippi River (which Spain closed in 1784). 

- Another big problem related to the fact that under the AOC Congress couldn’t enforce treaties. Consequently, state governments didn’t enforce the part of the Treaty of Paris about paying prewar debts, which gave the British the perfect excuse for not removing their forts on the Western frontier. 

Management of the Western Territories

- Speaking of the Western frontier…after the Treaty of Paris the US assumed that all the land East of the Mississippi (ex. for the land held by the Spanish) was theirs. Nevertheless, they realized they would have to negotiate w/local tribes. 

- At Fort Stanwix, N.Y. in 1784 American diplomats negotiated a treaty w/chiefs claiming to be representing the Iroquois, and in 1785/1786 they did the same for the Choctaw, Chickasaw and Cherokee in Hopewell, South Carolina. Although in 1786 the Iroquois said the treaty had been made by imposters and threatened to attack, the US called their bluff, realizing the treaty stood by default. By 1790, New York State had, by purchasing land from individual Iroquois nations, reduced the Confederacy to scattered reservations. 

- In the Southwest the US also regarded the treaties as license to send settlers into Indian lands, but this provoked the Creeks [hadn’t signed Hopewell treaty] into declaring a war that didn’t end until 1790. 

- Also, after the collapse of Iroquois power, tribes that had previously allowed the Confederacy to speak for them began demanding direct negotiations with the US At first they were ignored, as they couldn’t use their old diplomatic strategy of pitting powers against e/o [only the US was left]. 

- So anyhow the US went ahead and planned out an organization for the Northwest Territories (Mississippi River, Great Lakes, Ohio River boundaries) in a series of ordinances:

• Land Ordinances of 1784/1785 – these laws described the process by which land would pass from public to private hands…

  • The area would be divided into more than 4 but less than 7 states.

  • The area would also be surveyed in to townships of 36 sq. mi. each, each of which would be divided into 36 towns.

  • The ownership of the territories would be transferred to the federal government, which would then make $ by selling the lands to individuals.

  • Revenue from one out of every 36 squares would be used for public schools.

• Northwest Ordinance of 1787 – these laws described the process by which territories would become states…

  • Every new state was to have the same rights as the original states.

  • Slavery could not be established in the area.

  • 3 Phases to get in: (1) AOC appoints a governor and 3 judges, (2) if there are 5000 adult male landowners then a territorial legislature can be created to manage local issues, and (3) if the population exceeds 60000 people then delegates can be elected to write a state constitution, if Congress approves of the constitution then it is a state.

- Ordinances or no ordinances, though, in 1787 the US still hadn’t formed an agreement w/several Indian tribes, who attacked pioneers. Consequently, in 1789 the Northwest Territory’s first governor, Arthur St. Clair, attempted to negotiate a treaty, but failed, setting off a war with a western confederacy of tribes. 

- The US suffered some initial defeats but in August 1794 the confederacy was defeated at the Battle of Fallen Timbers. The Treaty of Greenville subsequently gave the US the right to settle much of Ohio but also (finally) recognized the principle of Indian sovereignty. But this, of course, was after the AOC was replaced by the Constitution…

The Constitutional Convention Meets

- So what spurred the change from the AOC to the Constitution? One element was that Americans in trade, finance, and foreign affairs soon realized the AOC was crap b/c Congress couldn’t levy taxes, establish a uniform commercial policy, or enforce treaties. Also, the economy, partially b/c of the AOC, fell into a depression after the end of the war (restrictions on exporting to Br./Fr./Sp. colonies). 

- Recognizing the economic issues, representatives of Virginia and Maryland met independently at Mt. Vernon in March 1785 to discuss an agreement over trade on the Potomac. It was a success, which led to a call for a general meeting of the states in Annapolis in September 1786 to discuss trade policies. Only 5 delegations ended up coming, but they issued a call for another convention in Philadelphia. 

- The other states didn’t respond until Shays’ Rebellion gave them a wake-up call. In January 27, 1787 Shays led a set of angry western farmers against a federal armory in Springfield. They declared the government tyrannical, using language reminiscent of the Declaration of Independence.  

- This was the last straw in convincing many a strong central government was necessary, so in May 1787 every state ex. Rhode Island sent delegates to a Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia.   

Debates and Compromises at the Constitutional Convention

- Although most of the delegates to the CC were men of property who favored reforms that would give the national government more authority over taxation and foreign trade, and many were also involved in the creation of their state constitutions, they still had some differences in opinion…

- For instance, after James Madison proposed the Virginia Plan, delegates from smaller states came up with the New Jersey Plan. The plans were as follows:

• Virginia Plan – embodied Madison’s idea of a strong national government and provided for a bicameral legislature (lower house elected by people, upper elected by lower) with representation proportional to population, an executive elected by Congress, a national judiciary, and a Congressional veto over state laws. 

• New Jersey Plan – was a response to the VP, especially by the small states (didn’t like the representation proportional to population deal) who felt the AOC shouldn’t be totally thrown out, just strengthened a little (unicameral legislature w/each state having an equal vote, only difference is Congress gets new powers of taxation and trade regulation.)

- The eventual compromise involved the creation of a bicameral legislature in which one house was to be directly elected by the people and the other house was to be elected by the state legislatures. Proportional representation was allowed for the lower house, but the upper house was eventually declared to be equal representation (2 senators, but they would vote as individuals, not as a block). 

- On the whole, congressional powers were more limited than in the VP but more flexible than in the NJP. The executive was given primary responsibility for foreign affairs and was designated the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. A key element was separation of powers and checks and balances. 

- Then there was the whole should we count slaves dilemma…naturally Southern states wanted them counted for representation purposes and Northern states only wanted them counted for taxation purposes. In the end a slave was declared to be 3/5th of a person. Also, inherent protections of slavery were worked in to the Constitution (slave trade couldn’t end for 20 years, fugitive slave laws, etc.) 

- Anyhow, the CC had its last session on September 17, 1787 and only then was the Constitution made public. All that was left was ratification…

Opposition and Ratification

- Later in September the CC submitted the Constitution to the states but didn’t formally recommend its approval. The ratification clause of the Constitution stated that it would be approved by special conventions in at least 9 states (delegates were to be qualified voters – so it was directly based on popular authority.) 

- As states began electing delegates, two distinct camps formed:

• Federalists – the Federalists supported the Constitution and stuck by the virtuous, self-sacrificing republic led by a merit-based aristocracy idea. Since leaders were to be virtuous, there was no need to fear a strong central government. Besides, there was the separation of powers. 

• Antifederalists – the Antifederalists felt that weakening the states would lead to the onset of arbitrary and oppressive government power (based on Real Whig ideology.) Antifederalists were generally old hard core revolutionaries (Tom Paine, Sam Adams, etc.) and small farmers.

- One thing that was big on the Antis agenda was the idea of a Bill of Rights (why doesn’t the Constitution have one?), best expressed in the major Anti pamphlet, Letters of a Federal Farmer. 

- Anyhow, the Federalists won out (duh), partially b/c of the publication of The Federalist and partially b/c of the promise to add a bill of rights. Ratification was (prematurely, it turns out) celebrated on July 4, 1788.