Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

should have a population of twenty thousand free inhabitants. It further provided that any of the States may be admitted into the Union when their number of free inhabitants is as many as any one of the least numerous of the thirteen original States; and that the several States should bear the following names: Sylvania, Michigania, Cheronesus, Assenisipia, Metropotamia, Illinoia, Saratoga, Washington, Polypotamia, and Pelesipia. It proposed, also, five "articles of compact," which were quite unlike the six articles in the Ordinance of 1787. The fifth article was as follows: "That after the year 1800 of the Christian era, there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the said States, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been personally guilty."

The report was recommitted, and on the 22d of March a second report was made, substantially the same as the first, except that the fanciful names of the new States were stricken out.

On the 19th of April, on motion of Mr. Spaight of North Carolina, seconded by Mr. Read of South Carolina, a vote was taken whether the fifth article of compact should stand. The vote was six States in the affirmative and three in the negative. In the old Congress the method of voting was quite different from that of the present Congress. All business was voted upon by States, and the affirmative vote of seven States, a majority of the original thirteen, was necessary to carry any measure. No State could vote unless it had at least two delegates present. In that case, both must vote in the affirmative, or the vote of the State was lost. If three delegates were present, two affirmative votes could carry the vote of the State. It seldom happened that as many as ten of the original thirteen States were represented at one time. Six States only voting for Mr. Jefferson's antislavery cause, it was lost. The ordinance, without any slavery restriction, passed April 23, 1784; and was, chiefly from the absence of such a restriction, a dead letter. No settlement of the territory was made under it.

The defeat of Mr. Jefferson's antislavery clause was regarded at the time as a great calamity: but Northern men soon saw that it was a most fortunate circumstance; for if slavery had been allowed to get a foothold in the territory for

sixteen years, it could not have been abolished at the end of that period. We have already seen what was the state of public sentiment in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio at that time. Timothy Pickering of Massachusetts, writing to Rufus King, March 8, 1785, said: "I should have objected to the period proposed for the exclusion of slavery; for the admission of it for a day or an hour ought to have been forbidden. It is infinitely easier to prevent the evil at first than to eradicate it or check it at any future time. For God's sake, let one more effort be made to prevent so terrible a calamity."

March 10, 1784, seventeen days after the passage of his ordinance as amended, Mr. Jefferson resigned his seat in Congress, and, having been appointed minister to France, soon after left the country, and did not return till December, 1789. And yet Mr. Benton, Governor Coles, and others, with an entire misconception of the facts of the case, award to Mr. Jefferson the honor of being the author of the Ordinance of 1787, an entirely different instrument. Mr. Jefferson is, however, entitled to the credit of bringing forward and using his influence to carry, in opposition to the vote of his own and of every other Southern State, some sort of slavery prohibition; and especially of devising the happy idea of "articles of compact," which was made use of in the later Ordinance. Here Mr. Jefferson's claim of authorship ends.

March 16, 1785, eight days after the date of Mr. Pickering's letter just quoted, Mr. King of Massachusetts, seconded by Mr. Ellery of Rhode Island, moved that the following resolution be committed:

"Resolved, That there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of the States described in the resolve of Congress of the 23d of April, 1784, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof the party shall have been personally guilty; and that this regulation shall be an article of compact, and remain a fundamental principle of the Constitutions between the thirteen original States, and each of the States described in the said resolve of the 23d of April, 1784."

Eight States voted to commit, and three States (Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina) voted in the negative. The resolution was therefore referred to the committee of the

whole, there being then no committee on the Territories. Delaware and Georgia were not then represented by delegates in Congress. Mr. Webster was mistaken as to the disposition of this resolution. He supposed the vote was upon its passage, whereas it was only on its commitment. He says: "The votes of nine States were not yet obtained, and thus the provision was again rejected by Southern votes."* The resolution went to the committee, and was never called up for action by Mr. King, Mr. Dane, or any other member; and so far as appears, was never again alluded to. It certainly was not incorporated into any of the several plans subsequently submitted, previous to July 11, 1787; and one of these may have been drawn by Mr. Dane, he being a member of the committee who reported it.

On the 24th of March, 1786, a report was made by the grand committee of the House to whom had been referred a motion of Mr. Monroe concerning the Western Territory. On the 10th of May of the same year, a committee consisting of Mr. Monroe of Virginia, Mr. Johnson of Connecticut, Mr. King of Massachusetts, Mr. Kean of South Carolina, and Mr. Pinckney of South Carolina, reported an ordinance for the Northwest Territory, which was recommitted, and considered from time to time. This committee was appointed on motion of Mr. Dane; but he was not a member of it. On September 19 of the same year, another committee, consisting of Mr. Johnson of Connecticut, Mr. Pinckney of South Carolina, Mr. Smith of New York, Mr. Dane of Massachusetts, and Mr. Henry of Maryland, appointed to propose a plan of temporary government of the territory, made a report which was discussed from time to time for several months. April 26, 1787, the same committee reported another ordinance, which took its second reading and was amended May 9. Its third reading was assigned for the following day. May 10, the third reading

* Works, Vol. III. p. 283. Mr. Dane, also, misconceived the import of this vote. He says: "So the article against slavery was supported, March 16, 1785, by a large majority, as an article of compact, and to remain a fundamental principle in the constitutions between the thirteen original States and each of the States in said territory." (General Abridgment and Digest, Vol. VII. p. 443.) If the vote had been on its enactment it would have passed, as the vote of seven States was sufficient for that purpose.

was called for "by Massachusetts," as the record states, and probably by Mr. Dane, who was a member of the committee having it in charge. Mr. King and Mr. Gorham, both of Massachusetts, were also present. No vote was taken, and final action was postponed. Among the papers found by Mr. Force was the original draft of this ordinance as it stood on the 10th of May, and as it came down without amendment to the 9th of July, only five days before the real Ordinance of 1787 was passed. Mr. Force has printed its full text. That Mr. Dane or any other Northern man should have served on a committee which drafted such an ordinance, and called for its third reading on the 10th of May, 1787, is evidence that there were very crude ideas in Congress at that time as to what an ordinance defining the fundamental laws of the Northwestern Territory should be. It had no resemblance to the Ordinance which passed on the 13th of July. It had no restriction of slavery, none of those sublime principles as to personal and civil rights, education, religion, and morality, and the obligation of contracts, which appeared in the later Ordinance. It had no articles of compact; in short, it had none of those provisions which have made the Ordinance of 1787 so beneficial and renowned. Mr. Dane, in his letter to Mr. Webster, calls this the Report of 1786, for the reason probably that the committee was appointed in 1786. He says: "In its formation Mr. Pinckney, myself, and, I think, Smith, took a part. So little was done with the Report of 1786 that only a few lines were entered in the journals. I think the files, if to be found, will show that report was reformed, and temporary parts added to it by the committee of 1787."* Mr. Dane, in the lapse of forty-three years, had evidently forgotten the import of that report, for it was not printed in his lifetime, and he was in doubt whether it could be found. It has probably never been printed except in Mr. Force's paper, which was copied from the "National Intelligencer" into the "Western Law Journal," published at Cincinnati, for September, 1848. This report becomes important evidence in developing the history of the Ordinance of 1787, and is here reprinted:

* Mass. Hist. Soc. Proceedings, 1867-69, p. 447.

AN ORDINANCE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE WESTERN TERRITORY. It is hereby ordained by the United States in Congress assembled, that there shall be appointed, from time to time, a Governor, whose commission shall continue in force for the term of three years, unless sooner revoked by Congress.

There shall be appointed by Congress, from time to time, a Secretary, whose commission shall continue in force for four years, unless sooner revoked by Congress. It shall be his duty to keep and preserve the acts and laws passed by the General Assembly, and public records of the District, and of the proceedings of the Governor in his executive department, and transmit authentic copies of such acts and proceedings every six months to the Secretary of Congress.

There shall also be appointed a Court, to consist of three judges, any two of whom shall form a Court, who shall have a common-law jurisdiction, whose commissions shall continue in force during good behavior. And to secure the rights of personal liberty and property to the inhabitants and others, purchasers in the said Districts, it is hereby ordained that the inhabitants of said Districts shall always be entitled to the benefits of the act of habeas corpus and of the trial by jury.

The Governor and judges, or a majority of them, shall adopt and publish in the Districts such laws of the original States, criminal and civil, as may be necessary and best suited to the circumstances of the District, and report them to Congress from time to time, which shall prevail in said District until the organization of the General Assembly, unless disapproved of by Congress; but afterwards the General Assembly shall have authority to alter them as they think fit: provided, however, that said Assembly shall have no power to create perpetuities.

The Governor for the time being shall be commander-in-chief of the militia, and appoint and commission all officers in the same below the rank of general officers: all officers of that rank shall be appointed and commissioned by Congress.

Previous to the organization of the General Assembly, the Governor shall appoint such magistrates and other civil officers in each county or township as he shall find necessary for the preservation of peace and good order in the same. After the General Assembly shall be organized, the powers and duties of magistrates and other civil officers shall be regulated and defined by the said Assembly; but all magistrates and other civil officers, not herein otherwise directed, shall, during the continuance of this temporary government, be appointed by the Governor.

« ZurückWeiter »