As promised. Happy Fourth everyone, and this is a fairly appropriate update for today.
____
6. A More Perfect Union? Part 1.
(Excerpt From: The Richmond Convention and the Road to the Constitution by Grant Haversham, William and Mary University Press, 2000):
That the results of the Richmond Convention were unexpected, particularly by the southern states, has become a truism of history. Old South League historiography has crafted a narrative of innocent, noble southern farmers hoodwinked by moneyed northern interests. The reality, of course, was far more complicated... the slowly forming Arnold faction was as eager for the convention, and for radical change at the convention, as Hamilton, Madison and Laurens, as they feared a spill-over of slave rebellions from British Florida and Cuba. Closer union, it was believed, would lead northern states to come to the defense of their southern brethren in the face of any future British-backed slave rebellion. Rather than being outmaneuvered, these southern delegates actively cooperated with Hamilton, Laurens and Madison. By contrast, it was the fractious Pennsylvania delegation and a minority of the Massachusetts delegates who raised the most serious impediments to any attempt to broaden the convention's mandate. It is also important not to over-estimate Richmond's role in the eventual constitutional process. Indeed, the results of the Richmond convention, at first, seemed like a failure for those who favored closer union, since no firm steps were taken to address the pressing issues of land claims and state debts. A recommendation, drafted by Hamilton, Laurens and Madison that the states should commit to a fifty percent increase in the funds provided by the continental congress was only followed by New York, Connecticut and Acadia in the end, although several other states, including Pennsylvania, made more modest increases. The greatest success, a joint statement supported by all the delegates that a subsequent convention must be called in Philadelphia to address "necessary reforms" to the articles of confederation was, at the time, regarded as an afterthought, and certainly viewed favorably by most southern interests...
(Excerpt From: Founding Family):
Their time in Richmond was remembered by both Angelica Laurens and Eliza Hamilton as a singularly happy one. At long last, for the first time since Paris, the family was gathered in one place, though the Jays were of course absent. The Schuylers and Hamiltons took up residence at a stately old house near the capital, where the convention was underway, and entertained sumptuously. Their guest list included George and Martha Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Marshall, Lighthorse Harry Lee, George Mason and even the irascible Patrick Henry. Hamilton and Laurens also reconnected with Richard Kidder Meade, an old friend from their days on Washington's staff. Finally they were overjoyed to host General Nathanael Greene, who traveled down from his home in Rhode Island to visit Washington, but extended his stay to visit Hamilton and Laurens in Richmond. Thomas Jefferson was, surprisingly given later events, a frequent guest, who was favorably inclined toward Mr. and Mrs. Laurens in particular. He was quite charmed by Angelica, and spent many hours in conversation with John Laurens on the subject of manumission. Less close to the Hamiltons, Jefferson still enjoyed a relatively cordial relationship with Alexander and Eliza...
(Excerpt From: John Adams: A Political Life by Anna Martin Brigs, University of Massachusetts Press, 1997):
Still smarting from his dismissal by the continental congress, Adams did not attend the Richmond convention at first. At length, however, he was "compelled by circumstances" to make his presence felt. The particular circumstance that exercised him was a dispute within the Massachusetts delegation between Elbridge Gerry and Samuel Adams, prominent states rights advocates, and the other Massachusetts delegates. "I fear the federal party in Massachusetts has no man to equal Gerry and Samuel Adams", Madison told his friend Jefferson, "a fact that has caused no end of grief for our national project". It is significant not only that Jefferson responded sympathetically to this concern for nationalism, but also that he passed on the concerns to Adams. At this point, even Jefferson was "more favorably disposed than not" to the project of closer union, as he wrote in a letter to Adams. Already, Jefferson expressed his hope that "a man of your stature and moderation might exercise some restraint" on some of the "rambunctious young men" advocating the national cause. Adams arrived in time to sign the joint statement calling for a new convention in Philadelphia. And it became clear, after Richmond, that he would be the indispensable man of the Massachusetts delegation at such a gathering...
(Excerpt from: A Desperate and Despicable Body):
As it turned out, the last act of the continental congress would be an incredibly acrimonious debate over the admission of the state of Niagara. John Jay, upon taking the oath of office as governor of New York, quickly proposed, and the legislature passed, a law permitting the amicable separation of what was then known as the "western New York back country" from the state of New York, with the express purpose of "providing a just and fair recompense" for “those Negros, Indians and other continental soldiers that provided such excellent service during the war". This process having begun, and the seigneurs of Quebec proving willing to cede their claims to those parts of Canada bordering the great lakes, Niagara's statehood was presented to the congress as a foregone conclusion. Yet it would prove one of the most divisive issues the continental congress had faced. On one hand, many southern delegates reacted with horror at the thought of, as Pierce Butler described it, “a state dominated by former chattels so recently freed from bondage and manifestly incapable of self-government". On the other, states’ rights advocates argued that, if New York wished to allow part of its sovereign territory to secede and form a new sovereign state, it was no business of any other sovereign state, and refusal to admit Niagara would set a dangerous precedent. Hamilton, Jay, Schuyler and the other supporters of Niagaran statehood gleefully supported the arguments of the states’ rights party, and even found themselves in temporary accord with the Clintonian remnant. By contrast, the Niagara controversy weakened the state's rights party in the south, who began to fear the creation of a host of new, under-populated free states that would each have equal weight with their own in the one state one vote continental congress. "The question," as Patrick Henry, the current head of the Virginia delegation, put it, "is vexing, in that it places in conflict our liberties and our way of life". With deepest reluctance, Henry was forced by his state's rights principles to argue that "the liberty of New York to do as it wishes with its own territories must not be infringed, and if these United States are, in truth, sovereign, we can but recognize the fruits of their actions, no matter how objectionable they may be". Henry's supposed "weakening" on the issue of slavery led some of his more ardent Virginian supporters to drift away, while Jefferson gave Henry his quiet support. With Henry's acquiescence the acceptance of Niagara's statehood seemed assured, but the delegations from South Carolina and Georgia opposed it, and given the unanimity required under the articles, the Niagaran delegation could not be seated...
(Excerpt From: Founding Family):
As Philadelphia drew near, Hamilton was ruthless in using the Niagara issue to keep New Yorkers united. With hostility against the congress at an all-time high, and even the Clintonian remnant furious at the body's unwillingness to ratify the clear will of the New York legislature, it was child splay for Hamilton to stack the state's delegation with those committed to closer union. Yet it must be said that Hamilton's enthusiasm was tempered by Jay and, to some extent, Laurens. Hamilton's initial list of delegates read like a who's who of Schuyler faction loyalists and Hamilton friends, including Rufus King, Robert Troop and Rensellear Schuyler, Hamilton's brother-in-law. Jay urged Hamilton to "exercise sound judgment in ensuring a balanced representation from our state's diverse interests", and recommended some amendments, including the addition of Jay's friend Robert R. Livingston, James Duane, and even Melancton Smith, a moderate Clintonian. Livingston would beg off, but Duane, Smith, Hamilton, Brockholst Livingston and Rufus King were eventually chosen. In South Carolina, by contrast, Laurens found himself saddled with a much less favorable delegation. In particular, Pierce Butler would prove a thorn in his side, though he would find Thomas Pinkney to be a staunch ally on all issues excluding abolition...
(Excerpt From: “The Forgotten Connecticut Men: Ellsworth, Sherman and the Making of a Nation" by Abigail Chilcott, Connecticut Historical Review, vol. 35, issue, 6, July-August, 2010):
The Connecticut delegation to the constitutional convention has often been under-estimated, yet the team of Sherman and Ellsworth were critical to the eventual development of the constitutional balance. Motivated by Calvinist covenantalism, Connecticut's delegation instinctively favored a balance between centralized and state power. Even before the convention began, Ellsworth and Sherman began making fruitful contacts with other moderate delegates, in particular the head of the Pennsylvania delegation, Frederick Muhlenberg. During the early days of the convention, Ellsworth was also in regular and close contact with John Laurens, giving him a back door into both the New York and South Carolina delegations. Though later historians have emphasized the role Adams played in crafting this moderate current, careful analysis indicates that Adams inherited what the Connecticut delegation built. Due credit, of course, must also be given to the work of Madison in herding the fractious Virginia delegates...
(Excerpt From: Founding Family):
Hamilton, Laurens and Madison threw themselves into preparation for the convention, with an eye to drawing on the symbolism of the revolution as much as possible. Though Hamilton initially wished to hold the convention in New York, where he could guarantee a climate more favorable to the national project, Laurens and Madison quickly convinced him that Philadelphia must be the host city, in order to root the constitution’s development in the symbolism of the revolution. This decision made, Hamilton threw himself into wrapping the convention in the revolution, going so far as to pay impoverished continental soldiers from each state, out of his own pocket, if they were willing to don the uniform one last time and serve as honor guards for their state’s delegates. This also gave Hamilton the opportunity to raise an honor guard of the old First New York to stand in support of the Niagara delegation, whose inclusion he hoped to fight for once the convention opened. In addition, Benjamin Franklin was tasked with "hosting" the convention, a role in which he would welcome the delegates and arrange several substantial parties and entertainments from among the great and good of Philadelphia. George Washington was to be nominated as the largely ceremonial president of the convention, a nomination expected to be carried by acclamation. Finally, it was no accident that the convention chose the same hall in which independence was declared as its venue, and opened on the morning of July 4, 1786...