History of the Origin, Formation, and Adoption of the Constitution of the United States, Vol. 1: With Notices of Its Principle FramersCurtis, George Ticknor
History
History of the Origin, Formation, and Adoption of the Constitution of the United States, Vol. 1: With Notices of Its Principle Framers
Curtis, George Ticknor
Constitutional history -- United States
In Connecticut, the opposition to the plan of enabling
Congress to fund the public debts arose from the jealousy
with which the provision of half-pay for the officers of the
army had always been regarded in that State. In October,
1783, Governor Trumbull, in an address to the Assembly
declining a reëlection, had spoken of the necessity of
enlarging the powers of Congress, and of strengthening the
arm of the government. A committee reported an answer to this
address, which contained a paragraph approving of the
principles which the Governor had inculcated, but it was
stricken out in the lower house. Jonathan Trumbull, Jr., who
had been one of Washington's aids, thus wrote to him
concerning the rejection of this paragraph: "It was rejected,
lest, by adopting it, they should seem to convey to the
people an idea of their concurring with the political
sentiments contained in the address; so exceedingly jealous
is the spirit of this State at present respecting the powers
and the engagements of Congress, arising principally from
their aversion to the half-pay and commutation granted to the
army; principally, I say, arising from this cause. It is but
too true, that some few are wicked enough to hope, that, by
means of this clamor, they may be able to rid themselves of
the whole public debt, by introducing so much confusion into
public measures as shall eventually produce a general
abolition of the whole." (Writings of Washington, IX. 5,
note.) It appears from the Journals of Congress, that in
November, 1783, the House of Representatives of Connecticut
sent some remonstrance to Congress respecting the resolution
which had granted half-pay for life to the officers, which
was referred to a committee, to be answered. In the report of
this committee it was said, that "the resolution of Congress
referred to appears by the yeas and nays to have been passed
according to the then established rules of that body in
transacting the business of the United States; the resolution
itself had public notoriety, and does not appear to have been
formally objected against by the legislature of any State
till after the Confederation was completely adopted, _nor
till after the close of the war_." These words were stricken
out from the report by a vote of six States against one, two
States declining to vote. The journal gives no further
account of the matter. (Journals, IX. 79. March 12, 1784.)
In Massachusetts, the half-pay had always been equally
unpopular. The legislature of that State, on the 11th of
July, 1783, addressed a letter to Congress, to assign, as a
reason for not agreeing to the impost duty, the grant of
half-pay to the officers. The tone of this letter does little
credit to the State.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account